Paul Tillich - Journey to Japan in 1960 9783110303070, 9783110302998

Citation preview

Paul Tillich – Journey to Japan in 

Tillich Research

Tillich-Forschungen Recherches sur Tillich

Edited by Christian Danz, Marc Dumas, Werner Schüßler, Mary Ann Stenger and Erdmann Sturm

Volume 

Paul Tillich – Journey to Japan in  Edited by Tomoaki Fukai With a preface by Friedrich Wilhelm Graf

DE GRUYTER

ISBN ---- e-ISBN ---- ISSN - Library of Congress Cataloging-in-Publication Data A CIP catalog record for this book has been applied for at the Library of Congress. Bibliographic information published by the Deutsche Nationalbibliothek The Deutsche Nationalbibliothek lists this publication in the Deutsche Nationalbibliografie; detailed bibliographic data are available in the Internet at http://dnb.dnb.de. ©  Walter de Gruyter GmbH, Berlin/Boston Printing: Hubert & Co. GmbH & Co. KG, Göttingen ♾ Printed on acid-free paper Printed in Germany www.degruyter.com

Contents Preface

VII

A Commentary on Paul Tillich’s Visit to Japan: May 3 – July 10, 1960 Introduction 1 1 Post-war Japan and Tillich’s Visit 3 2 The Social Condition of Japan in the 1960’s 9 3 Tillich in Japan from May 3 to July 10, 1960 11 3.1 Tillich in Tokyo (Part 1): From May 3 to May 22 12 26 3.2 Tillich in Kyoto — From May 23 to June 13 3.3 Tillich in Tokyo (Part 2): From June 14 to July 10 36 3.4 Tillich in Sendai: From June 26 to June 28 42 3.5 The Final Lecture in Tokyo 43 3.6 Vacation in Japan 44 4 The Material Collected in this Publication 46 A

Lectures

49

The Philosophical Background of My Theology Historical Remarks 51 The Theological Use of this Material General Remarks 59 The Basic Ideas of Religious Socialism Religion and Culture

51 55

61

71

God as Reality and Symbol 79 The Tention between the Concrete and the Absolute in the Development of the Idea of God 81 The Idea of God and Realized Problems 83 God as Spirit and the Problem of Personality; and Personalistic Thinking in Protestantism and Bourgeois Society 83 God as Power and Love 84 Love and Compassion (Amida) 84

1

VI

Contents

Spiritual Foundation of Democracy. First Lecture: Philosophical Foundations 85 Concepts of Individuality 85 Dêmo and Kratia 86 B

Dialogue with Buddhist in Kyoto

Tillich encounters Japan 93 Dialogue 1 93 Dialogue 2 98 Appendix 109 Answers to Questions

91

110

A talk by Dr. Paul Tillich given before the Study of Japanese Religious Group at the Seiken Kaikan on June 7, 1960 on The Demonic Problem: Demonization of Religion 111 C

Informal Report on Lecture Trip to Japan – Summer 1960 115

Informal Report on Lecture Trip to Japan – Summer 1960 D

Preface to Professor Tillich’s Collected Lectures

Preface E

Letters

Letters F

139 141 143

Pictures

Pictures

205 207

Index of Names

231

113

137

Preface On 25 October 1965, the “Frankfurter Allgemeine Zeitung” published Dolf Sternberger’s obituary for his academic teacher Paul Tillich. Beginning in 1930, Sternberger had studied under Tillich in Frankfurt, receiving his doctorate in 1932 for a dissertation entitled “Der verstandene Tod. Eine Untersuchung zu Martin Heideggers Existenzialontologie”, published in 1934. The topic had been suggested by Theodor W. Adorno, but Tillich was Sternberger’s supervisor and thus submitted the main report on a book that he, as he cheerfully admitted, could hardly comprehend due to its sheer complexity. In his obituary, Sternberger gave an account of the seminars at Frankfurt University that Tillich used to give in collaboration with colleagues such as Max Wertheimer, Kurt Riezler and Karl Mannheim, where students could experience an “exalted state of participatory thinking”. He also reported on seminars Tillich held in Chicago, in collaboration with Mircea Eliade, on “religiöse Urphänomene” such as the “Figur des Mittlers, die Idee der Schöpfung und der Endzeit” – and the subsequent conversations in “Eliade’s hospitable home”, equipped with some “strong drink”. Tillich, “the reconciliator”, “found his way in all surroundings, in an innocent, sometimes even charmingly clumsy devotion, which was all the easier for him 1 since he was neither plagued by distrust nor troubled by sharp pride.” Sternberger’s sympathetic description of his teacher impressed me so much that I – a mere Sixth Former at an honourable Protestant Gymnasium at the time – clipped his obituary from the newspaper and kept it as the first treasure in my private theological archive. On 24 July 1969, I travelled from Frankfurt via Hamburg and Anchorage (Alaska) to Tokyo. At the time, there were no direct flights from Germany to Japan since neither Lufthansa nor Japan Airlines were allowed to fly over the USSR’s territory. I was the speaker of a delegation of young Germans as part of the German-Japanese Youth Exchange Programme. We were received with grand protocol and in quasi-official mission by the Japanese Prime Minister Sato Eisaku at his offices in the (old) Kantei opposite the parliament building in Nagatacho, and subsequently met the president of the Diet, the Governors of several Prefectures, the mayors of many towns and cities, and all kinds of representatives of politial institutions and societal organisations. They all invited us

1 Dolf Sternberger, Ein Nachruf für Paul Tillich, in: Frankfurter Allgemeine Zeitung, No. 248, 25.10.1965, 16; reprinted in: In memoriam Paul Tillich 1886–1965. Nachrufe. Ansprache Paul Tillichs auf der “Convocation Pacem in Terris”. New York. February 1965, Stuttgart 1965, 9–12, here 9.

VIII

Preface

for an inter-cultural exchange of thoughts. As speaker of this group, consisting mainly of young sportspeople (primarily Judoka) and university students, it was my task – at the tender age of 20, shortly after my Abitur exams in provincial Westfalia and before first setting foot in a university lecture hall – to give official speaches in English, under the watchful eyes of German diplomats and strict Japanese officials, thanking our hosts for their gracious invitations, the very warm receptions, and the all too generous gifts we received – a gratitude I was glad to convey. The many contradictory, fascinating as well as disturbing experiences in this foreign and remote country were overwhelming. Wonderful evening receptions and parties at the German Embassy and formal banquets at the Japanese Ministry of Foreign Affairs facilitated a wide array of contacts to Japanese students, but also to professors, writers, journalists, and artists. The Asahi Shimbun, the world’s second largest newspaper, printed an interview with me on the “student movement” of 1968 in Germany while a well-known TV personality invited me to her talk show to ask about my experiences in Japan. When the Permanent Secretary of the Japanese Foreign Ministry learned that I was about to begin my studies in philosophy, Protestant theology, and history (and that I was generally very interested in religion), he helped me establish contact with prominent Buddhist intellectuals and monks. For fourteen days, I was allowed to live high up in the mountains, in a Buddhist monastery near Kyoto that had never before admitted a foreigner. There, to my great surprise, I learned about religiously structured daily rituals where strict body control, for example by fierce fencing with wooden swords, played as great a role as meditation. Furthermore, I subsequently spent one week in blissful natural surroundings near a great waterfall at the “Kumano Nachi-Taisha” shrine. The Ministry of Foreign Affairs facilitated a meeting with the near-octogenerian Ariga Tetsutaro, who had long held a chair for Christian Studies at Kyoto University. He promoted his vision of a genuinely Japanese form of Christianity and explained his fascinating concept of indigenisation. At the old Imperial University in Kyoto, I could often speak with well-known philosophers. The name Paul Tillich was mentioned rather frequently. Professors in Kyoto and Tokyo alike told me that they had listened to Tillich’s lectures when he had visited Japan in 1960. They also recommended that I soon read Tillich’s texts in order to arrive at a suitable understanding of Protestant Christianity and the state of religion under conditions of the 20th century. Three Tillich paperbacks I own (“The Courage to Be”, “Dynamics of Faith” – in the First Harper Paperback edition of 1958 – and “The Protestant Era”) were all purchased in 1969 in an international Christian book shop near Ginza in Tokyo. One of the highlights of my stay in Japan – aside from a long private visit to Kenzo Tange, the most important architect of New Objectivity in the country – was a meeting

Preface

IX

with the renowned theologian Kazo Kitamori, who had been teaching at the Tokyo Union Theological Seminary since 1949 and became famous in the West with his book “Theology of the Pain of God”, originally published in 1946 and translated into English in 1965. For several hours, this very courteous and distinguished gentleman of 50 years explained his theology to a young German and told stories from his student days at Kyoto Imperial University, where he was mainly taught by Hajime Tanabe, a student of the famous philosopher Kitaro Nishida. Reservedly, yet in a amicably firm manner, he also offered some advice on how to structure my studies of theology and philosophy. He also told me of his encounters with Paul Tillich. During Tillich’s visit to Tokyo, he took him to a Kabuki theatre for an entire day, which deeply impressed the German or rather American visitor. On the last evening of my first stay in Japan, at a great dinner in “Shinsanyo” Garden, I promised our Japanese counterparts, who had become our friends, and the many prominent representatives of the German and Japanese political classes that I was certain to return very soon to this deeply fascinating “land of the rising sun”. But as a university student and doctoral researcher, I had neither sufficient time nor sufficient money to fulfil this promise; later, professional duties in Germany stood in the way of accepting invitations to Japan. Only in the 1990s was I able to return to this land of my youthful experiences in variety and diversity. In my lectures and seminars at Seigakuin University and several other Japanese universities (the International Christian University in Tokyo, Doshisha University in Kyoto, Tohoku University in Sendai, Todai University in Tokyo, and Rikkyo University/St. Paul’s University in Ikebukuro), Paul Tillich always was of central importance. In particular during conversations with Tomoaki Fukai, who had studied at Augsburg from 1992 to 1996 and was an excellent conoisseur of German-language history of theology of the (late) 19th and 20th centuries, I gained an increasingly precise impression of how German theologians such as Ernst Troeltsch, Karl Holl, Karl Barth, and Paul Tillich had influenced Japanese Protestant theology in the 20th century. Hideo Ohki, the president of Seigakuin University, who had studied in the United States and was strongly influenced by the brothers Reinhold and Richard H. Niebuhr as well as Paul Tillich, gave vivid accounts of his meetings with Tillich. And Yasuo Furuya, the other Grand Old Man among Protestant theologians at Seigakuin University, fascinated me with stories of Tillich’s visit to Japan; he had studied at Princeton Theological Seminary and was the first Japanese to receive a Th.D. at an American university after the end of the Second World War. He had translated several of Tillich’s texts into Japanese and his “History of Japanese Theology”, the first history of modern Protestant theology in Japan written by a Japanese, outlined the strong influence of Paul Tillich on theologians and philosophers of religion such as En-

X

Preface

2

kichi Kan, Takenosuke Miyamoto, and Yoshio Noro. Yasuo Furuya also took part in a dinner held in honour of Hannah and Paul Tillich on 6 May 1960, hosted by his former students at Union in New York or other American universities. In one of our conversations, Dr. Fukai developed the plan to trace the path of Paul Tillich and his wife Hannah during their visit to Japan in 1960. The results of his ensuing intensive research is documented in the present volume. Tomoaki Fukai succeeded to tap hitherto unknown sources on Tillich’s trip to Japan in various archives, primarily the archive of the International House of Japan. He reports minutiously on the academic programme Tillich had agreed to complete, detailing the individual stages of the journey. He has left no blank spots. He knows the departure times of the trains that took Tillich from Tokyo to Kyoto and the arrival times of the taxi cabs that came to collect Paul and Hannah Tillich at the “International House”, situated in a beautiful old Japanese garden. He has unearthed the sequence of dishes on the menu cards of the festive dinners held in their honour and he can report the name of the Japanese intellectuals that Paul and Hannah Tillich met and spoke to. Even the interior design of the rooms the Tillichs inhabited at the “International House” is now part of his expertise. The historical sobriety that led Tomoaki Fukai to discover minute (yet significant) details is as impressive as his ability to analyse the political context of Tillich’s visit, not least the massive (and sometimes even violent) protests of Japanese students against their country’s close alliance with the United States. Tomoaki Fukai convincingly describes the social structures of a rapidly modernising Japan at the beginning of the 1960s. Tillich’s visit occurred during the implementation of a programme, largely financed by John D. Rockefeller III., to acquaint the rather anti-American (or at least critical) Japanese public with the great cultural achievements of their former enemy. In his own way, Tillich was supposed to garner support for the “American way of life” and modern democracy among Japanes intellectuals and, in particular, university students. It is hardly a coincidence that he spoke on “religious socialism” or on the “spiritual foundation of democracy”. Tillich proudly reported that his lectures were mostly over-subscribed and that he had to move to larger auditoria on several occasions. In his letters to friends and colleagues in the US and in Europe, Tillich repeatedly reported on his conversations with Buddhist scholars. He also spoke to representatives of the so-called “new religious movements” and to prominent Shinto priests. Tomoaki Fukai has succeeded in tracing these discussions with great

2 Cf. A History of Japanese Theology, ed. and trans. by Yasuo Furuya, Grand Rapids/MI/Cambridge 1997, esp. 51–54, 69–74, 101–104.

Preface

XI

attention to detail. He is particularly successful in discovering partially and fully unknown protocols of Tillich’s dialogues with Buddhist scholars held on 6 June 1960 at the Jidi Shin Sect Buddhist University in Kyoto and, on the following day, at the “Christian Center for the Study of Japanese Religion”. Furthermore, Dr. Fukai has traced a number of hitherto unknown pictures and photographs, of which only a mere handful can be published in this volume. Paul Tillich was received with great cordiality and was accorded very generous hospitality. Professor Shinichi Hisamatsu, whom he knew personally since fall 1957 (when the buddhist thinker and the christian theologian met 3 for several dialogues at Harvard University ), invited the Tillichs to his home, for example. Other private hosts also went to great lengths in order to generously entertain the Tillichs. One example: when Hannah and Paul Tillich visited Shigeharu Matsumoto and his wife on 5 May 1960, they served foie gras and mushrooms as an hors d’oeuvre, followed by a Leberknödelsuppe (liver dumpling soup) – based on a recipe that Mrs Matsumoto had obtained from a German chef in preparation for the occasion – and vegetables with a pigeon confit as a main course. This was complemented with German white and French red wine. The Japan Committee for Intellectual Interchange bore considerable expenses in investing in Tillich’s visit. By quantifying the high financial burden Tillich’s hosts were ready to bear when issuing their invitaton, the frequently ignored pecuniary foundation of modern cultural policy is put in the spotlight. For Tillich’s 20-day-long stay in Kyoto alone, surplus expenses (i. e. excluding the cost of the – expensive! – hotel, lecture honoraria and daily allowances) amounted to 323.724 yen (or 900 dollars, at a rate of 360 yen/dollar). The sums Tillich received for each of his talks and lectures were extraordinarily high by contemporary Japanese standards. For the entirety of their stay, Tillich and his wife could rely on a private secretary, while Tillich received an additional daily allowance of 30 dollars to cover their various private expenses. His Japanese hosts celebrated him and gave him access to rather large audiences, where he could present his theology and put himself in the spotlight. At the same time, Paul Tillich was known for his taste for good food and exquisite wines. Unfortunately, his doctors had not allowed him to drink Sake. But he ventured into Japanese night life on various occasions, leading him to bars, clubs, dens and even some more dingy places where it was easy to meet

3 Cf. Dialogues, East and West. Conversations between Dr. Paul Tillich and Dr. Hisamatsu Shin’ichi, Harvard, Fall, 1957, in: Paul Tillich, The Encounter of Religions and Quasi-Religions, ed. by Terence Thomas (Toronto Studies in Theology, Vol. 37), Lewiston NY, Queenston Canada, Lampeter UK, 1990, 75–170.

XII

Preface

women. Tillich, who repeatedly referred to himself as a split personality and sometimes mentioned his being somewhat “schizophrenic”, saw no reason to cease cultivating his strong tendencies to break out of quotidian academic life and to forego bourgeois convention during his stay in Japan. Officially, Hannah and Paul Tillich visited traditional tourist destinations, such as the Great Buddha of Kamakura, the Meiji Shrine in Harajuku (Tokyo), the Ise Grand Shrine (one of Japan’s most important Shinto shrines) as well as the great Buddhist temple complex Enryaku-ji at Mount Hiei. On Hannah’s behest, they took part in a specially arranged Nodate style Cha-no Yu (an outdoor tea ceremony), visited Nihon Mingeikan (the Japanese folk crafts museum), went to a Kabuki theatre in Ginza and could, on the generosity of an anonymous benefactor, take part in a festive dinner with Geisha entertainment. All of this had been meticulously organised by their hosts at the Japan Committee for Intellectual Interchange (JCII). A visit to a Noh theatre was also part of the programme: “yesterday 6 hours siting [!] in a Noh-Play, theater-type from the 13th century, very impressive, 4 but hard to sit out”, writes Tillich to Grace Calí in Harvard on 9 May. But Tillich’s Japan also had a very different, private, dark side. Late at night, “Paulus” went out, mostly alone or in the company of new-found American friends (both male and female), to the bars and clubs of the Tokyo amusement quarters of Roppongi Akasaka, Tameike-Sannô und Shimbashi. His hosts at the “International House” were somewhat surprised when the famous intellectual presented them with comparably high invoices for the purchase of several bottles of expensive wine, asking them to settle the bill for him. The night porters of the “International House”, too, were initially confused when Tillich, 73 years old at the time, would only return from his adventures very late at night or in the early mornings. As Tillich’s hosts were afraid that he might encounter a taxi driver unable to speak English or that he could not find his way back under the influence of alcohol, he was given a card that read “Please go to the I-House”. In mid-May, Tillich even spent some daytime hours in Ginza to scout out the venues of Tokyo nightlife and began to invite friends for heavy afternoon drinking sessions in some pubs – and sending the bills to his hosts. Five nights at least Paulus went to Gay Bars meeting young American and Japanese men. In spite of some irritations, however, his hosts remained generously welcoming and gave Hannah and Paul Tillich a great number of presents. On 26 July 1960, Tillich signed a letter to Grace Calí, his secretary at Harvard, with “love” and

4 Grace Calí, Paul Tillich First Hand. A Memoir of the Harvard Years. Introduction by Jerald C. Brauer, Chicago/Il 1996, 110.

Preface

XIII

“Paulus”, stating that: “there will several boxes arrive with innumerable gifts 5 from the Japanese temples, universities, etc.” Tomoaki Fukai conducted his research at the Seigakuin University General Research Institute and teaches at the Seigakuin University Graduate School. Starting on 1 April 2012, he accepted an offer to take the chair for European Cultural History at Ningenkagakubu, i. e. the Philosophical Faculty of Kinjo University in Nagoya. After his studies in Japan and Germany he published several studies on the history of ideas of German Protestantism in the early 20th century that were widely received in Japan. He was awarded his doctorate at Augsburg University for his thesis on “Paradox and Prolepsis. Reinhold Niebuhr’s and Wolfhart Pannenberg’s Theology of History”. In 2005, he received the Dr. Hajimi Nakamura Prize. In 2009, the Japanese Society for German Studies awarded him their “Academy Prize”. With “Paul Tillich – Journey to Japan 1960”, Tomoaki Fukai presents a documentation of Hannah and Paul Tillich’s visit to Japan that reaches far beyond previous attempts at summarising these nine particularly intensive weeks in Tillich’s life – such as in the (unfortunately not always accurate) biography of Marion (and Wilhelm) Pauck. The intellectual intensity Tillich displayed over the course of his exchanges with Japanese intellectuals – not only theologians and philosophers, but also social and cultural scientists – and the passionate love of life that led him into the nightlife of Tokyo and Kyoto, are as present in Fukai’s description as Tillich’s efforts to discover the complex religio-cultural layout of Japan. Hannah and Paul Tillich spent only nine weeks in Japan. But they remembered this time as a particularly intensive and enriching part of their lives. They arrived with great expectations, but the vast number of encounters and the particular generosity and kindness of their hosts made their encounter with this foreign and distant culture an event that exceeded even their boldest hopes. This is not least demonstrated by the hundreds of post cards that Paul and Hannah Tillich sent to various friends and colleagues in Germany and the US – all containing the proud statement to have arrived in an entirely different world. Only two examples: to his old friend Kurt Leese, Paulus wrote a picture post card of a Buddhist temple, dated 5 July 1960: “Lieber Kurt! Mit den Buddhisten kämpfe ich in vielen Diskussionen um Dein Princip der ‘agape’. Ich versuche Ihre com-passio mit agape gleichzusetzen. Das Ganze ist ein großes Erlebnis, 6 vielleicht wichtig für meine letzten theologischen Äusserungen . . . Dein Paulus”

5 Paul Tillich to Grace Calí 26 July 1960, in: ibid., 114. 6 Postcard Paul Tillichs to Kurt Leese, Hamburg, July 5 1970 (Postmark), in: Paul Tillich Archiv

XIV

Preface

And to Max and Maidon Horkheimer Hannah and Paul Tillich sent the message: “Lieber Max und Maidon! Von dem Glanz des Vergangenen ist noch viel übrig; aber es vergeht. Die Konflikts-Tage in Tokyo waren überaus spannend – ebenso 7 viele Gespräche mit den Buddhisten. Bericht später. Love Paulus u Hannah”. For Grace Calí, Tillich summarised his many impressions as follows: “reception 8 by the Japanese is marvellous. Very, very fine persons.” Tomoaki Fukai’s equally marvellous work now enables us to understand better this part of Tillich’s life. Munich, May 1, 2013

Friedrich Wilhelm Graf

Marburg: “Dear Kurt! With the Buddhists, I struggle in many debates over your principle of ‘agape’. I attempt to equate their com-passio with agape. The whole thing is a great experience, maybe important for my ultimate theological statements . . . Your Paulus”. 7 Picture Postcard Paul and Hannah Tillichs to Max and Maidon Horkheimer, Tokyo, June 4 1960, Universitätsbibliothek Frankfurt a. M., Archivzentrum, Max-Horkheimer-Archiv, NA 1 435, Altsignatur V 163, 62: “Dear Max and Maidon! Much is left of the splendour of the past; but it is vanishing. The Conflicts-Days in Tokyo were very exciting – as were the many conversations with the Buddhists. Report will follow. Love Paulus a. Hannah”. 8 Paul Tillich to Grace Calí, May 9 1960, in: Grace Calí, Paul Tillich First Hand, 110.

A Commentary on Paul Tillich’s Visit to Japan: May 3 – July 10, 1960 Tomoaki Fukai

Introduction From May 3 to July 10 in 1960, Paul Tillich, accompanied by his wife Hannah, visited Japan at the invitation of the Japan Committee for Intellectual Interchange (JCII) of the International House of Japan (IHJ) in Tokyo. Wilhelm and Marion Pauck describe this visit as follows: “His trip to Japan . . . served to widen his horizon as much as his transplantation to America had done twenty-seven years earlier. He had never been to Asia before, and his curiosity about a totally foreign culture overcame his initial reluctance to travel so far at his age. Thus, when the invitation to lecture there was extended, he accepted, insisting on the companionship of his wife . . . Any hesitation he had about the enterprise vanished upon his arrival in Japan. His working program had been so carefully arranged by the International Exchange Committee, his taxing schedule so evenly spaced between days of sight-seeing and public appearances, that he found himself under less strain than he had anticipated . . . Thus in 1960, between May and July, Tillich spent eight weeks, first in Tokyo, then in Kyoto, presenting his basic 1 theological ideas at ten Universities and preaching in several churches.”

During this visit to Japan, Tillich actively engaged in exchanges not only with theologians and philosophers but also with religious leaders of Shinto and of Buddhism, as well as scholars in the field of political science and social science. According to Tillich’s own reflection on these experiences in Japan, “they have confirmed my theological conviction that one cannot divide the religions of mankind [sic] into one true and many false religions. Rather, one must subject all religions, including Christianity, to the ultimate criteria of religion: the criterion of a faith which transcends every finite symbol of faith and the criterion of a love which unconditionally 2 affirms, judges and receives the other person.”

1 Wilhelm and Marion Pauck, Paul Tillich: His Life and Thought. Vol. I: Life, New York et al. 1976, 258 f. 2 Paul Tillich, On the Boundary Line, in: Christian Century, 7.12.1960, 1435–37, here 1435 (quoted in Pauck, n. 1, 261).

2

A Commentary on Paul Tillich’s Visit to Japan: May 3 – July 10, 1960

For Tillich, they were “spiritual experiences” which strengthened the conviction he had already developed before the visit. Tillich also had the following to say: “I cannot formulate what it has meant before all the impressions have settled down in me; and even then probably others will notice the influence of Japan more than I myself. But I know that something has happened: no Western provincialism of which I am aware will be 3 tolerated by me from now on in my thought and work [. . .].”

As this quotation indicates, these experiences had such a significant impact on Tillich’s later years. Curiously, however, his activities in Japan have not been 4 known in detail. In fact, the details such as where he visited in Japan, whom he met, what he lectured on, what kind of discussion he had with whom and the like were not known to scholars outside of Japan. On this matter, the situation may not be any better in Japan. While Tillich’s lectures in Japan were collected and published in Japanese from Iwanami Shoten under the title, “Bunka to 5 Shûkyô” (Culture and Religion) , the public (as well as the scholarly) interest does not go beyond the book unto this day. While some contributions have pointed out discrepancies between Tillich’s own account concerning his activities in Japan and the accounts of others, especially his diverse biographers, our understanding of these differences remains insufficient. To fill the lacuna, this publication collects all the records of Tillich’s activities in Japan currently available, which are in languages other than Japanese. The investigation on Tillich’s activities was conducted from November of 2009 to March 2010 in Tokyo, Kyoto, Sendai, and New York. The following commentary is based on the primary sources discovered in the investigation and aim at providing the reader first, the explanation on how Tillich’s visit was planned and prepared, and second, the detailed information of the activities of Tillich and his wife as much as possible.

3 Paul Tillich, Informal Report, 134 (p. 26 in the printout version). Pauck mistakenly refers to p. 1435 of “On the Boundary Line” (Pauck, n. 1, 260 f.). 4 For an important recent study on this matter, see Stefan S. Jäger, Glaube/Shinjin und Religiöse Rede bei Jodo Shinshû und Paul Tillich – ein Werkstattbericht, in: Karin Grau/Peter Heigis/Illona Nord (eds.), Tillich Preview 2010. Religion und Magie bei Paul Tillich, Berlin 2010, 65–76. Although this is an interesting article, it does not give sufficient consideration to Tillich’s experience in Japan in 1960. Also important is Marc Boss, Tillich in Dialogue with Japanese Buddhism. A Paradigmatic Illustration of his Approach to Inter-Religious Conversation, in: Russell Re Manning (ed.), The Cambridge Companion to Paul Tillich, Cambridge/New York 2009, which utilizes an abridged version of Tillich’s “Informal Report” in: Hannah Tillich, From Place to Place. Travels with Paul Tillich, Travels without Paul Tillich, New York 1976, 93–115. 5 An English translation of this publication was planned, but never materialized.

1 Post-war Japan and Tillich’s Visit

3

1 Post-war Japan and Tillich’s Visit Since it was the Japan Committee for Intellectual Interchange (JCII) of the International House of Japan (IHJ), a good understanding of the JCII and its promoter, 6 Shigeharu Matsumoto is necessary. Under the leadership of Matsumoto, IHJ was founded in the August of 1952 for the purpose of promoting cultural exchange 7 programs between Japan and the United States on a non-governmental level. 8 Shigeharu Matsumoto was born in Osaka, Japan in 1895. Matsumoto graduated from the Faculty of Law at Tokyo Imperial University in 1923, and went on to the graduate program of the same university. While maintaining his status there, Matsumoto entered the Department of Economics at Yale University (in 1924), and continued his study at universities in the United States, England and in Europe. Upon his return to Japan in 1928, Matsumoto became an assistant to Professor Yasaka Takagi of Tokyo Imperial University. Matsumoto attended the third conference of the Institute of Pacific Relations (IPR) held in Kyoto in 9 1929, and there he met with John D. Rockefeller III. , with whom he came to develop a life-long friendship. In 1932, the year Manchukuo was established (a year after the Manchurian Incident), Matsumoto joined the “Nihon Shimbun Rengôsha” (“Rengô” [Associated Press]) at the invitation of Yukichi Iwanaga, and immediately became 10 the head of the Shanghai bureau. Then in 1941, a few years after Rengô became “Dômei Tsûshinsha” (Dômei News Agency) in 1936, Matsumoto became the editor-in-chief. This executive commitment to the press came to cost him his public activities as journalist after the World War II. As the Potsdam Declaration

6 Shigeharu Matsumoto, “Response”, in connection with the presentation of an Honorary Doctor of Laws by Earlham College. April 23, 1980 (Mimeographed). See also, “Biography of Shigeharu Matsumoto”, The 1980 Ramon Magsaysay Award for International Understanding, Ramon Magsaysay Award Foundation (http://www.rmaf.org.ph/Awardees/Biography/ BiographyMatsumotoShi.htm). 7 “The Articles of Endowments of the International House of Japan, Inc.”, see “Chapter II. Objectives and Activities”, in: International House of Japan (ed.), International House of Japan, Inc.: Challenge, Response, Progress. 1952–62, Tokyo 1962, 71. The article 3 reads: “The object of this Foundation shall be to promote cultural exchange and intellectual cooperation between the people of Japan and the peoples of America and other countries, and thereby to contribute to the cultivation of international friendship and understanding.” 8 For a detailed biographical information on Matsumoto, see Jun Kamai, Matsumoto ShigeharuDen. Saigo-no Riberarisuto (A Biography of Shigeharu Matsumoto. The Last Liberalist), Tokyo 2009 (in Japanese). 9 Kaimai’s book (see n. 8 above) gives a detailed account of the relationship between Matsumoto and Rockefeller III. (395–401). 10 Shigeharu Matsumoto, My Shanghai Period, Tokyo 1975.

4

A Commentary on Paul Tillich’s Visit to Japan: May 3 – July 10, 1960

11

stipulates the elimination “for all time [of] the authority and influence” of militarists, the Supreme Commander of the Allied Powers General Headquarter (SCPA/GHQ) purged Matsumoto as a “collaborator” of war. Although this purge (“kôshoku tsuihô-rei”) originally targeted the war criminals, career soldiers and leaders of nationalist organizations, it was revised in 1947 and extended to the 12 press and financial circles. However, Matsumoto was well known as a minority liberalist throughout the wartime in Japan. Matsumoto made every effort to promote an attempted peace-seeking process between Japan and China when he was the head of the Shanghai branch of Dômei. Because of his commitment to peace, his house was searched frequently by the military police during the war. In fact, he was on a blacklist as a person of dangerous thoughts for the military government. Therefore, the post-war purge of Matsumoto as a “collaborator of war” and as a “militarist and radical nationalist” was unacceptable, not only to himself, but also to the people around him. Matsumoto’s mentor Yasaka Takagi of Tokyo University, who later administered the JCII of IHJ with Matsumoto after the war, advised him to submit a petition for inspection to GHQ on this matter. Matsumoto declined this thoughtful advice and accepted his wartime responsibility. In his letter to Takagi, Matsumoto writes the following: “After a calm and conscientious examination of my responsibility in the editorship of Dômei [News Agency] itself, I came to the conclusion that I was not able to write a petition for inspection which could 13 meet your expectation.” While many wartime nationalists and promoters of war exhibited a sudden change of their attitudes and frantic efforts for selfpreservation, maneuverability and concealment of all kinds, Matsumoto stood

11 Ibid, 47. The text of the Potsdam Declaration term 6 reads in full: “There must be eliminated for all time the authority and influence of those who have deceived and misled the people of Japan into embarking on world conquest, for we insist that a new order of peace, security and justice will be impossible until irresponsible militarism is driven from the world” (under the heading, “Text of the Constitution and Other Important Documents”, in The Ministry of Foreign Affairs “Nihon Gaiko Nenpyo Narabini Shuyo Bunsho: 1840–1945” vol. 2, 1966 [http://www.ndl.go.jp/constitution/e/etc/c06.html]). 12 For the information on the political situation of the post-war Japan and the occupational policies of GHQ, see John W. Dower, Embracing Defeat. Japan in the Wake of World War II, New York 1999 (original publication date/copyright is 1999; 2000 is a reprint.) 13 Tatsuo Kawai, Kokusai-teki Nihonjin-no Nagai Tabi. Henshûsha-no Matsumoto-sensei Zô (A Long Journey of an International Japanese. The Figure of Matsumoto the Editor), in: Shigeharu Matsumoto (Interviewed by Masao Kunihiro), Shôwa-shi eno Ichi-Shôgen (A Testimony to the History of the Showa Period), Tokyo 1986; new edition Tokyo 2001, 417–424, here 417 (page number is from the 2001 edition).

1 Post-war Japan and Tillich’s Visit

5

out in his acceptance of the wartime responsibility, and he worked hard for the post-war recovery of Japan in private sectors and non-governmental capacities until his purge was officially lifted in 1950. During his three-year purge period, Matsumoto, with Professor Takagi, established “Amerika Gakkai” (America Institute) in Japan. Jun Kaimai, a biographer of Matsumoto, explains the rationale for Matsumoto’s continued pursuit of American studies despite the fact that his purge was ordered by GHQ: “Japan should never again repeat the foolishness of war, and therefore should study and un14 derstand better the former enemy, America.” Matsumoto followed Professor Takagi and became the second chairperson. After Matsumoto was officially “de-purged” in 1950, he received some good news. In the February of 1951, John Foster Dulles came to Japan as a special envoy of the United States government, and was accompanied by Rockefeller III. This Dulles was the one who later became the Secretary of State in the cabinet of President Eisenhower, and the official purpose of his visit was to discuss the content of the peace treaty with Japan, which would end the occupation. Apart from the official purpose, Dulles was also entrusted a delicate political task of improving the image Japanese intellectuals held toward the United States in order to build new U.S.-Japan relations. The reform of post-war Japan by GHQ was under way by the strong leadership of General Douglas McArthur and through the policies drafted by the leftwing liberal military bureaucrats. This included not only the disarming of Japan’s military forces, but also the dissolution of “zaibatsu” (corporate dynasty), the renunciation of war, the reform of the educational system from universities down, agrarian reform, and the complete separation of religion and state. However, the intensification of the antagonism between the U.S. centered capitalist camp and the Soviet centered communist camp on the one hand, and the start of the Korean War on the other, forced the U.S. to quickly shift its occupation policy of Japan. According to Matsumoto, Dulles was “vaguely concerned that the anti-American sentiment might be intensified in Japan once the peace treaty was made and the American occupation was over, because the shift of the occupation policy to the ‘reverse course’ pushed many Japanese intellectuals 15 anti-American” . At this juncture, Dulles “accompanied Rockefeller III in the hope of fostering a cultural interchange between Japan and the U.S. to better the

14 Jun Kaimai, n. 8, 395. 15 Shigeharu Matsumoto, n. 13, 314.

6

A Commentary on Paul Tillich’s Visit to Japan: May 3 – July 10, 1960

U.S.-Japan relationship by remedying the pro-Soviet tendency in the intellectual 16 climate.” Upon his arrival in Japan, Rockefeller III immediately visited Matsumoto, his friend since the third conference of IPR, and conveyed to him Dulles’s intention along with his own ideas of the U.S.-Japan interchange program, which was to materialize the U.S. government’s conception of improving the U.S.-Japan relations through cultural exchange and a direct approach to Japanese intellectuals. Responding to Rockefeller, Matsumoto made a concrete suggestion: “If that is the case, you should promptly send the topflight thinkers and scholars from the United States to Japan. Then the image of America the Japanese intellectuals 17 have would change.” According to Matsumoto, Rockefeller “leaned over and 18 listened intensely to this suggestion.” In October of 1951, the same year, Rockefeller III came to Japan once again, this time accompanied by his personal legal adviser, to meet with Matsumoto. At the meeting, an agreement was reached about the plan for the establishment of a foundation for a cultural exchange program focused on the interchange of 19 persons. Under the condition that the Japanese side prepared a fund of 100 million yen by 1953, Rockefeller made a commitment to offer 170 million yen for the acquisition of land and the construction of buildings, as well as to finance the operating funds for the first five years in the amount of 25 million yen per year. In the end, the Japanese side prepared a fund of 400 million yen. In August of 1953, the foundation acquired property in Roppongi, which once held a mansion of the Iwasaki family of the old Mitsubishi zaibatsu. The international intellectual salon project was started there. Matsumoto was installed as the first 20 senior managing director of the International House of Japan. The responsibility for managing the intellectual interchange programs was shared between the Japan Committee for Intellectual Interchange, represented by Professor Yasaka Takagi of Tokyo University on the Japan side and the American Committee for Intellectual Interchange, set up in Columbia University and 21 represented by Sir George Bailey Sansom. The first person invited by this program was Professor Charles W. Cole, the

16 Ibid. 17 Ibid. 18 Ibid. 19 Japan Foundation Awards and the Japan Foundation Special Prized for 1979. F.P.C. Press Release No. 307, 18. 20 International House of Japan (ed.), International House of Japan. Cultural Bridge Between East and West, Tokyo 2009, 102 ff. 21 International House of Japan (ed.), n. 7, 28.

1 Post-war Japan and Tillich’s Visit

7

president of Amherst College and a prominent scholar in the field of economic history. In the same year, former First Lady Eleanor Roosevelt was invited, as well as Father Martin C. D’Arcy of the Campion Hall at the University of Oxford (as an exception, for he was British) and Father George B. Ford of Columbia University. In the 1950’s, the list of the invited guest speakers included such prominent figures as Norman Cousins, editor-in-chief of “Saturday Review”, William Faulkner, an American writer and the winner of 1949 Nobel Prize in Literature and Walter Gropius, an architect well-known as a “master of modern architecture”. The list also included speakers from outside the United States, such as British historian Arnold J. Toynbee, Professor Prasanta Chandra Mahalanobis of the Indian Statistical Institute, a French philosopher Gabriel Marcel, and 22 Jawaharlal Nehru, the first Prime Minister of India. The four guests of the first year in the 1960’s were theologian Paul Tillich, J. Robert Oppenheimer of the Institute for Advanced Study at Princeton, sociologist David Riesman of Harvard University, and Professor George F. Kennan of the Institute for Advanced Study at Princeton. The intellectual interchange with Paul Tillich excited a great expectation because Yasaka Takagi, the chairperson of JCII, was a member of the Religious Society of Friends (Quaker), and Shigeharu Matsumoto was also a Christian of the Nonchurch Movement (“Mukyôkai”) with direct influence from Kanzo 23 Uchimura, the founder of this movement. Programs for the visit of Tillich were planned not only in Tokyo but also in Kyoto. The responsibility for the programs in Tokyo was assigned to Takagi, and the responsibility for the programs in Kyoto was assigned to Tetsutaro Ariga, Professor of Christian Studies at Kyoto University, who had studied at Union Theological Seminary in New York in the 24 past and had known Tillich since Tillich’s German years.

22 For the details of the activities of the International House of Japan, see Shigeharu Matsumoto, n. 13, esp. 328–347. See also, International House of Japan (ed.), n. 7, 26–51, 81–101. 23 For the information on the Nonchurch Movement in Japan and Kanzo Uchimura, see John F. Howes, Japan’s Modern Prophet: Uchimura Kanzo. 1861–1930, Vancouver 2006. Kaimai claims that Matsumoto was not a Christian when he attended Uchimura’s Bible study meetings on the basis that he was baptized just before his death (Jun Kaimai, n. 8, 67–68). However, since Mukyôkai does not have any sacrament, including baptism, Matsumoto’s baptism at the latest stage of his life is not a sufficient ground for his claim. On the other hand, Tillich clearly states in his Informal Report at both Takagi and Matsumoto belonged “to the small group of non-denominational Christians, the so-called Non-Church movement” (p. 117 below) (p. 3 in the printout version). 24 For the information on Ariga, see Tomoaki Fukai/Takashi Sato, An Aspect of the Jewish Question in Modern Japan. Correspondence between Leo Baeck and Tetsutaro Ariga, in: Zeitschrift

8

A Commentary on Paul Tillich’s Visit to Japan: May 3 – July 10, 1960

Ariga was entrusted with the task of writing a letter of request to Tillich for the lecture trip to Japan because of his friendship with Tillich. The request was delivered to Tillich who was staying in Chicago at the time. Upon careful consideration, Tillich accepted the invitation with the condition of his wife Hannah accompanying him. As soon as the acceptance reached JCII, numerous preparatory meetings were held. At the meeting on September 14, 1959, it was decided that IHJ would cover the following costs: round trip, first-class airfare for Mr. and Mrs. Tillich; a daily allowance of 30 dollars for the duration of their stay in addition to the gratuities for lectures and the expenses of their stay; as well as the expenses for translators and those who took care of them 25 in Japan. At an October meeting (date unknown), the themes and topics for the lectures to be requested were discussed, and it was decided that JCII should request Tillich that he lecture not only on his own theological concerns and the concepts he developed but also on the significance of religion for contemporary philosophy, the philosophy of religion, religious socialism, the relationship between democracy and Christianity, and on “religion and culture”. Further, JCII prepared various interchange programs for the Tillichs to have meaningful discussions not only with specialists of theology or philosophy, but with leaders of other religions, specialists of different fields and other intellectuals as well. For this reason, at the very last stage of preparation, an additional lecture was scheduled in Sendai, where Tohoku University, the most important 26 university in northern Japan, is located. The committee also took special care for the plans during “off days” such as relaxation and sightseeing so that the first encounter of Professor and Mrs. Tillich with Japanese culture could be as historically meaningful and comprehensive as possible in a limited time span. Thus, the committee prepared various locations for trips such as Kyoto, Nara, Kamakura, Ise, Matsushima (in Sendai), Karuizawa, and Nikko. They also prepared occasions to enjoy traditional arts such as “Chanoyu” (tea ceremony), Kabuki, Noh play, and Bunraku puppet play.

für Neuere Theologiegeschichte (Journal for the History of Modern Theology) 17/2, 2010, 246– 270. 25 This information is from the unpublished material, “Materials on Tillich”, which is archived in IHJ. 26 The lecture in Sendai was not in the original plan. As it is detailed in the following, and as the letter in this collection makes it clear, it was planned at the initiative of Rev. Yoshiaki Toeda, a pastor in Sendai, and was approved and added to the schedule just before the visit of the Tillichs.

2 The Social Condition of Japan in the 1960’s

9

2 The Social Condition of Japan in the 1960’s 1960, the year Paul Tillich visited Japan, marked significant changes in social and political situation in postwar Japan. Japan’s recovery began in 1945 when the Allied Powers – in reality, the United States – implemented the occupation 27 policy. The occupation policy lasted for six years and was terminated by the peace treaty signed between Japan and 49 allied countries of the World War II in San Francisco on September 8, 1951 (the so-called “San Francisco Peace Treaty”). On the same day, however, Prime Minister Shigeru Yoshida, the chief plenipotentiary of Japan, also signed the “United States-Japan Security Treaty”. This was the treaty which enabled the United States, one of the Allied Powers, to station its troops indefinitely in Japan under the name of “zainichi-beigun” 28 (the United States Forces in Japan: USFJ). The negotiation for the revision of the 1951 security treaty began sometime around 1958. In January of 1960, a Japanese delegation with full authority headed by Prime Minister Nobusuke Kishi visited the United States to have a talk with President Dwight D. Eisenhower, and they reached an agreement on the President’s formal visit to Japan and the signing of a new security treaty on June 19 of the same year. The main purpose of the revision of the U.S.-Japan Security Treaty was to make the relations between the two parties more even by eliminating the article concerning the internal disturbances by stipulating the collaborated defense by the U.S. and Japan (in return for the protection by U.S. Forces, Japan’s Self-Defense Forces were to collaborate in defense in the case of hostile attack on the USFJ), and by installing a system for prior consultation. In short, the revision aimed at transforming the original unilateral treaty, under which Japan was obligated simply to provide bases for the USFJ, into a reciprocal 29 treaty, which would impose on Japan the obligation of collaboration in defense. Incidentally, Tillich was staying in Tokyo, when the new security treaty bill was rammed through the House of Representatives on May 20, 1960. The passage of the new treaty in such a heavy-handed manner was nothing but the “destruction of democracy” in the eyes of many ordinary citizens, and it generated a mass opposition movement. Hundreds of thousands of people

27 John Dower, n. 12, 28 ff. 28 On this point, see e. g., Yoshiko Nozaki, War Memory, Nationalism and Education in Postwar Japan. The Japanese History Textbook Controversy and Ienaga Saburo’s Court Challenges, London/New York 2008, 38. 29 See e. g., Sven Saaler/J. Victor Koschmann, Pan-Asianism in Modern Japanese History. Colonialism, Regionalism and Borders, London/New York 2006.

10

A Commentary on Paul Tillich’s Visit to Japan: May 3 – July 10, 1960

demonstrated around the Diet Building in protest, and the protest continued to 30 intensify as the days went by. When James C. Hagerty, the White House Press Secretary under President Eisenhower, arrived at Tokyo International Airport in Haneda on June 10 to discuss the schedule of the president’s visit to Japan, thousands of demonstrators swarmed around the airport and Hagerty was rescued by a helicopter from the 31 U.S. Marine Corps. On June 15, the Japanese “mafia” (“Yakuza”) and the “Uyoku” (a right-wing organization), attacked the demonstrators and many were heavily wounded. It is suspected that these antisocial elements had received an unofficial request from the government, separately from the police forces, in order to suppress the demonstration. The riot police, on the other hand, engaged in an all-out attack on the student demonstrators in front of the Diet Building, and Ms. Michiko Kamba, a Tokyo University student, was crushed to death in 32 this battle. According to the organizer of the demonstration, total number of demonstrators reached as high as 330,000. The treaty was automatically approved without a vote in the House of Councilors on June 19 (based on the superiority of the House of Representatives over the House of Councilors), and the visit of President Eisenhower was postponed (in effect, cancelled). In order to bring the situation under control, the Kishi Cabinet assumed the responsibility and resigned en masse on June 23, the day the governments of Japan and the United States exchanged the instrument of ratification. Later, when the Ikeda Cabinet was formed on July 19, the “Anpo 33 Tôsô” (the anti-security treaty protest) quickly waned. This was partly because the public concern shifted rapidly from political issues such as the security treaty to economic issues when the Ikeda Cabinet developed the “Income-Doubling Plan”. That is why we find rather frequent mentions of the Japanese situation in Tillich’s lectures and letters, particularly the U.S.-Japan relations. The aforementioned situation reflects the long effort to establish democracy as a political system firmly in postwar Japan under GHQ’s guidance on the one hand, and it also betrays the fragility of the political sense of Japanese intellectuals under the influence of traditional spirituality and unchanging political mentality from prewar Japan on the other. There was also a disappointment both inside and

30 The Asahi Shimbun (Asahi News Paper), May 21, 1960. 31 The Asahi Shimbun, June 12, 1960. 32 Sandra Buckly, Broken Silence. Voices of Japanese Feminism, Berkeley/Los Angeles/London 1996. (Ms. Kanba only appears in the chronology on p. 315). 33 See e. g., Mari Yamamoto, Grassroots Pacifism in Post-War Japan. The Rebirth of a Nation, London/New York 2004, 28.

3 Tillich in Japan from May 3 to July 10, 1960

11

outside the churches in Japan with the American-style Christianity, which spread in postwar Japan with the support of GHQ, or to put it more precisely, with the political senses and attitudes of American churches. In a sense, the evangelistic efforts of missionaries, which placed emphasis on conversion and repentance, produced in Japan a rather naïve Christianity on issues concerning politics and social justice. Another contributing factor to this characteristic of Japanese Christianity could be found in the mistaken political attitude, which Japanese churches wrongly inferred from the theology of Karl Barth. Barth’s methodology of “Christological concentration”, the concentration on the Word of God, the “Sache”centric nature of his theology, and his insistence on the significance of revelation, all contributed somehow to enable Japanese Christians to escape from the reality of the world and equipped them with the misguided notion of “pure theology”, which only talks about the transcendent without any regard of political reality. Christianity and Christian theology in Japan was busy creating a “sacred island” in the world, separated from society and culture, and Japanese society in turn regarded Japanese churches as such. In other words, Japanese churches and their theology had lost the means to engage themselves in social and cultural issues. To remedy the loss of means, Japanese churches tried to remedy the loss by simply adopting Marxist social theories or those of the “Frankfurter Schule”. Thus, the theology led by “two Karls” emerged; in this theology, one follows Karl 34 Barth inside the church, whereas one follows Karl Marx outside the church. This was the situation of Japanese churches and their theology, when the direct encounter with Paul Tillich and his thought took place.

3 Tillich in Japan from May 3 to July 10, 1960 The details of the program the Japan Committee for Intellectual Interchange (JCII) prepared for the intellectual interchange with Paul Tillich was hitherto mostly unknown even in Japan. The following is an attempted reconstruction based on the newly discovered materials from the recent investigation. Nineteen different kinds of itineraries were preserved in the International House of Japan (IHJ), and the careful comparison of them reveals numerous changes, adjustments and additions. As the letter in this collection indicates, Tillich telegrammed his intention to cancel due to illness at the preparation stage

34 This is Karl Barth’s own words, which is found e. g., in: Karl Barth, Der Christ als Zeuge, München 1934 (= Theologische Existenz heute, vol. 12).

12

A Commentary on Paul Tillich’s Visit to Japan: May 3 – July 10, 1960

at one occasion, and he changed the date of his arrival at another occasion. In addition, his stay was extended for one week along the way. In the end, the detailed schedule was finalized only 20 days before his arrival in Japan. The detailed schedule below is a reconstruction from three sources: two separate itineraries preserved in Tokyo and Kyoto, and a business log recorded by Hiroko Kako, Tillich’s secretary during his days in Japan.

3.1 Tillich in Tokyo (Part 1): From May 3 to May 22 Paul Tillich arrived in Haneda Airport in Tokyo, the only international airport in Japan at the time, at 5:55 a.m. on Tuesday, May 3, 1960 via Pan-American Airline flight 1 from Honolulu. Tillich first took a flight from New York to San Francisco, transferred there to the flight to Honolulu, and transferred again at Honolulu to the flight to Tokyo. At Haneda Airport at dawn to meet him were not only Yasaka Takagi and Shigeharu Matsumoto, but also Kiyoko Takeda, an assistant professor at International Christian University and Tillich’s student at Union Theological Seminary in New York. Tillich wrote down this meeting at Haneda in his “Informal Report” as follows: “When we arrived at Tokyo Airfield it was a first expression of Japanese hospitality that at this hour of six a.m. most members of the Committee were present to receive us, which meant for them getting up at four a.m. and 35 earlier.” In 1960, Tokyo was rapidly redeveloping in preparation for the upcoming Tokyo Olympic Games four years later. Expressways were not completed yet, and the opening of the “Shinkansen” (“Bullet Train”) service between Tokyo and Osaka was still four years in the future, the same year as the Olympics. The postwar “high-speed growth” was still underway, as the 1956 “Keizaihakusho” (the Annual Report of the Economic Planning Agency of the Prime Minister’s Office) proclaimed that Japan was “no longer in the postwar period”. The signing of the new U.S.-Japan Security Treaty between President Eisenhower and Prime Minister Kishi became a serious sociopolitical problem, inciting student violent demonstrations in protest over the revision and extension of the treaty. Indeed, 1960 marked the peak of anti-American sentiment in Japan. The reserved taxi carrying Professor and Mrs. Tillich headed for the International House of Japan. The “I-House”, so nicknamed, was the site of the former Iwasaki residence of the old Mitsubishi “zaibatsu”, as already mentioned. While

35 Paul Tillich, Informal Report, see 115 below (pp. 1–2 in the printout version).

3 Tillich in Japan from May 3 to July 10, 1960

13

the original building was destroyed during the war, its magnificent Japanese garden remained, and the site now held a new structure, which was designed under the collaboration of three masters of Japanese modern architecture: Kunio Maekawa, Junzo Itakura, and Junzo Yoshikura. The design of the new building beautifully incorporated the original Japanese garden, which was designed and constructed by a famous gardener, 7th generation Jihç Ogawa, in 1930 in the style of “Kaiyû-shiki” garden (strolling garden). The room originally prepared for the Tillichs was a hybrid of Japanese and western styles. It was changed to a solely European style room after they returned from the lecture trip in Kyoto to meet the needs of Professor Tillich as he had made a request at the preparation stage for the change of schedule because of his illness. From this first day on, daily allowances of 30 dollars were paid to the Tillichs on a weekly basis. The I-House has the copies of the receipts. The dollar-yen 36 exchange rate at the time was fixed to the rate of $ 1 to 360. According to this rate, 30 dollars converted to 10,800 yen. In those days an average monthly income of Japanese workers was 21,000 yen, which means that the total amount paid to the Tillichs during their two-month stay exceeded twice as much as the average annual income of Japanese workers. While the daily allowance of 30 dollars may appear modest in terms of contemporary exchange rates, it was a large amount under the exchange rate of the time when the Japanese yen was kept deliberately low; the total amount Tillich received, including the honorariums for the lectures, was indeed extravagant. Wednesday, May 4: The Tillichs participated in an informal meeting and a luncheon with the Japan Committee members from 10:00 a.m. at the I-House. According to the seating list, 9 members participated the meeting-luncheon: Yasaka Takagi (Chairman), Shigeharu Matsumoto (Managing Director), Arao Imamura (Professor Emeritus at Osaka University), Tano Jodai (President of Japan Women’s University), Naoto Kameyama (Former Chairman of the Science Council of Japan), Shinzo Koizumi (President of Keio University, Chief Tutor of the Crown Prince), Saburo Matsukata (Managing Director of Kyodo News Service, Councilor of National Museum), Tamon Maeda (Japanese Representative of UNESCO), and Kiyoko (Takeda) Cho (Assistant Professor at International University). The conversation at the luncheon turned to the date of Tillich’s arrival in Japan. The date was May 3, which was a Japanese national holiday called “Constitution Memorial Day”. Tamon Maeda pointed out that the date was fitting

36 Later in 1971, the fixed rate was abandoned and the floating exchange rate system was adopted. The exchange rate as of February, 2012 is $ 1 to 80.

14

A Commentary on Paul Tillich’s Visit to Japan: May 3 – July 10, 1960

for Professor Tillich because it commemorated the establishment of the new constitution, the Constitution of Japan, established with the help of American Occupation Forces after the war, which replaced the old Meiji Constitution, the Constitution of the Empire of Japan, established under the influence of the political system of the Empire of Germany under Wilhelm I, and with the help 37 of German scholars of constitutional law. The secretary for Tillich during his stay in Japan was Hiroko Kako, a staff member of the I-House, of whom Tillich praised as follows: “Of the many members of the staff who helped us in the difficulties of our ‘illiterate’ existence in Japan, I want to mention my secretary, Mrs. Kako, with whom I worked every morning for at least half an hour and who was ready for every imaginable help during the whole day. We 38 called her ‘Dear Kako’, and soon felt quite familiar with her.”

Kako was a secretary of the Japan Committee for Intellectual Interchange and was in charge of everything related to the exchange program. Thus, the correspondence with Tillich, memorandums of various sorts, records of receipts and disbursements, and the detailed daily schedules were all classified, cataloged 39 and stored in the I-House archives. It is known from the extant literature on Tillich that this celebrated intellectual was rather enthusiastic when it came to celebrating a colourful nightlife. Incidentally, Tillich frequently visited bars and cabarets around the I-House during his stay in Tokyo. Roppongi, Akasaka, Tameike-sanno and Shimbashi are popular downtown areas of Tokyo, which are either within walking distance or within reach of a short taxi ride. In addition, these were (and still are) areas where many foreign embassies, and thus foreigners living or staying in Japan, were concentrated. Aside from the receipts of Tillich’s daily allowances, the I-House filed a number of additional receipts covering large sums of money; they were the receipts the I-House paid for Tillich’s eating and drinking at said bars and cabarets. While official dinners and luncheons were always paid for by JCII, all private spending at these places was settled in a two-stage process, according to

37 The draft of the Meiji Constitution was prepared with the legal advisers to the Meiji Government, Karl Friedrich Hermann Roesler and Albert Mosse, under the guidance of Heinrich Rudolf Friedrich von Gneist of the University of Berlin and Lorenz von Stein of the University of Vienna. The postwar constitution was drafted under the guidance of GHQ. 38 Paul Tillich, Informal Report, 117 below (pp. 3–4 in the printout version). 39 These daily schedules were carefully prepared everyday, detailing Tillich’s activities by 30 minutes. The list of schedules were handed to the Tillichs either daily when the schedule was full, or weekly when the schedule was not full.

3 Tillich in Japan from May 3 to July 10, 1960

15

the receipts brought by Tillich. To be specific, Tillich visited a popular Roppongi bar, “M”, four times during his stay in Tokyo and spent 97,000 yen in total. Three receipts cover an Akasaka cabaret, “Young Lady”, which added up to 62,000 yen. Another receipt from an Akasaka hostess club, “Nozaki”, indicates that three bottles of expensive imported wine were sent to the I-House and two bottles were sent to the bar “M”, the cost of which was 64,000 yen in total. These receipts were settled and subsequently kept by the I-House. According to the record of JICC, Tillich enjoyed visiting these places once his daily schedule had been completed, and indeed, he visited them rather frequently during his stay in Tokyo. To facilitate his safe return by taxi, he was given a memo with the sentence, “Please go to the I-House”, written in Japanese. The members of JICC and the staff of the I-House were somewhat perplexed, at first, by the contrast of Tillich the theologian and Tillich the man. Tillich the theologian delivered lectures and engaged in activities of intellectual interchange energetically for his age, whereas Tillich the man visited bars and cabarets after his work was done, either alone or with his newly acquainted American friends, returning late at night. Thursday, May 5: This day was another Japanese national holiday called “Children’s Day”, which was originally called “Tango-no Sekku”, the day for prayer for the children’s health and happiness. On this day, the Tillichs visited Kamakura, which was the historic location of “Kamakura Bakufu”, the Shogunate estab40 lished by “Minamoto no Yoritomo”, who was appointed as Shogun in 1192. Since Japanese Buddhism flourished during Kamakura period, a number of famous temples are located in this ancient city of Kamakura. At 10:00 a.m., the 41 Tillichs took a taxi to Shinbashi Station, and took a train ride to Kamakura via the Yokosuka-line. The Tillichs not only enjoyed the tour of temples and the “Daibutsu”, the statue of Great Buddha, but also, in accordance with Mrs. Tillich’s request, practiced Zen meditation and ate “Shôjin Ryôri”, a special Buddhist cuisine with no meat or fish, which is similar to vegetarian diet. The Great Buddha of Kamakura made a great impact on Tillich, as he states in his report: “The one in Kamakura stands out in the landscape, without a roof, overwhelming in its dimensions and its beauty. We saw it a few days after our arrival and I felt that I now would live for two months in his shadow – though more in

40 See Paul Varley, Warriors of Japan. As Portrayed in the War Tales, Honolulu 1994. 41 Shinbashi is near Tokyo Central Station, but the station itself is older than Tokyo Station. Shinbashi is not far from Roppongi, where the I-House is located.

16

A Commentary on Paul Tillich’s Visit to Japan: May 3 – July 10, 1960

42

cultural than in an immediately religious respect.” Mr. and Mrs. Matsumoto 43 accompanied this day trip, and invited the Tillichs for dinner. Friday, May 6: The Tillichs spent most of the day at the I-House quietly until evening to have a good rest after a rather long trip the previous day. In the evening there was an informal dinner with Tillich’s former students and his old acquaintances, including those who went to the U.S. to study under Tillich after he was exiled from Germany and those who heard his lectures in the U.S. This informal dinner was an idea of Matsumoto’s. The invitation was made in advance in the name of Chairman Takagi, and the letters of invitation, which were sent out by Kako, read as follows: “As we greet the season of new green leaves, I send you greetings and pray for your continued health and happiness. As you may have already heard, Dr. Paul Tillich, professor at Harvard University, and Mrs. Tillich are coming to Japan as honored guests at the invitation of the Japan Committee for Intellectual Interchange, and are arriving on May 3. Blessed with such a wonderful opportunity, I would like to invite those of you who had the privilege of studying under Professor Tillich in the past or have a close relationship with him for an informal dinner as an expression of our hearty welcome to Professor and Mrs. Tillich. The invitation is made to the following persons: Kiyoko Cho, Yasuo Furuya, Kenneth Heim, Enkichi Kan, Shinako Kan, Kyohei Minaga, Takenosuke Miyamoto, Yoshio Noro, Kiyoshi Ôsuga, Toshi[kazu] Takao, Masaichi Takemori, Michio Taniguchi, and Kano Yamamoto.”

Among the invited persons, the actual attendants were the following: Kiyoko Cho, Yasuo Furuya, Enkichi and Shinako Kan, Kyohei Minaga, Takenosuke Miyamoto, Yoshio Noro, Toshikazu Takao, Masaichi Takemori, and Kano Yamamoto. Kiyoko Cho, a female thinker, studied under Reinhold Niebuhr at the Union Theological Seminary before the Second World War, and was a member of JCII, as previously mentioned. Professor Yasuo Furuya, a colleague of Cho at International Christian University, was a theologian who studied at Princeton Theological Seminary and was the first Japanese person to receive the degree of Th.D. after the World War II through his research on Ernst Troeltsch. Enkichi Kan, who introduced the theology of Karl Barth to Japan, was originally know for his scholarship in the field of philosophy of religion, and was a professor at the Department of Christian Studies in the College of Arts of Rikkyo University. His wife Shinako was a professor of philosophy at Japan Women’s College. Tillich’s lectures were

42 Paul Tillich, Informal Report, 131 below (p. 21 in printout version). 43 The menu for the dinner was left on record: According to Kako’s business log, it consisted of foie gras and mushrooms for an hors d’œuvre, Leberknödel Suppe for soup, which Mrs. Matsumoto learned from a German chef, vegetables of the season, and a pigeon confit for the main dish.

3 Tillich in Japan from May 3 to July 10, 1960

17

scheduled both at Rikkyo University and Japan Women’s College. Kyohei Minaga was one of the pioneer theologians in the field of pastoral psychology in Japan, who studied at Union Theological Seminary and Boston University. Minaga had participated in Tillich’s lectures in the United States, and was teaching pastoral psychology at Tokyo Union Theological Seminary at the time. Takenosuke Miyamoto was a philosopher of religion and a professor at Tokyo Union Theological Seminary. Yoshio Noro was one of the first foreign students to have received a Th.D. at Union Theological Seminary after World War II, and was teaching systematic theology at the Theology Department of Aoyama Gakuin University. Toshikazu Takao was a systematic theologian, who studied at Columbia University and taught at Ibaragi Christian University and the Faculty of Theology of Kanto Gakuin University. Masaichi Takemori was a New Testament scholar, who had studies at Union Theological Seminary, returned there after the World War II as a visiting professor at one time, and later became the president of Tokyo Union Theological Seminary. Kano Yamamoto did not have any experience of studying abroad, and his point of contact with Tillich is unknown. The informal dinner/meeting continued well beyond the planned time and finally broke up at 10:30 p.m. when Hannah Tillich declared an end to the proceedings out of concern for her husband’s health. Saturday, May 7: The Tillichs took a day off. On this day, Tillich expressed his great interest in “Meishi” (business cards), which Japanese people always carry and exchange when meeting others for the first time, and made a request to Kako to prepare business cards for him so that he could use them during his stay in Japan. Kako quickly prepared 100 business cards for Tillich with the address of the International House of Japan in Roppongi, and Tillich had used 44 up all 100 of them before his return to the United States. Sunday, May 8: The Tillich’s enjoyed a Noh play, a traditional Japanese performing art, at Yarai Noh Stage of the Yarai Kanze Family, which is located in Yarai-cho in Shinjuku, Tokyo. As a type of Japanese stage performing art and one of three fields of “Nogaku”, Noh was established during the period between 45 the late Kamakura period and the early Muromachi period. It was called “Noh

44 Only one of them was preserved in the Tillich collection in the archives of the I-House. The information is printed on both sides; the obverse is in English, and the reverse is in Japanese. 45 On Noh, see e. g., John Wesley Harris, The Traditional Theatre of Japan. Kyogen, Noh, Kabuki and Puppetry, Lewiston/New York 2006 and Ulrike Dembski/Monica Bethe (eds.), Nô-Theater: Kostüme und Masken, mit Einleitung von Stanca Scholz-Cionca, Wien 2003.

18

A Commentary on Paul Tillich’s Visit to Japan: May 3 – July 10, 1960

of Sarugaku” before the Edo period. Noh and “Kabuki” are two of the most well known traditional performing arts of Japan. The Tillichs left the I-House at 2:30 p.m. by taxi, and returned to the I-House at 5:00 p.m. Monday, May 9: This became a highly impressive day with new experiences for Tillich. He visited Meiji Shrine to have a conversation with the priests of 46 Shintoism, which is one of the religious traditions in Japan. He then also visited Kokugakuin University, which has a program for training Shinto Priests. Later in his days in Japan, Tillich also visited Ise Shrine. The Meiji Shrine was build to commemorate Emperor Meiji and Empress Shôken. After the death of the emperor in 1912 and the death of the empress in 1914, people expressed their wishes for the building of the shrine for the deified spirits of the emperor and empress. In response, the cabinet set up a search committee for the building of the shrine, and based on the report of the committee and with the blessing of Emperor Taisho, the Home Ministry made an official notice on May 1, 1915 of the building of Meiji Shrine as a “Kanpei-Taisha”, a first-rank government supported shrine. Meiji Shrine has since been a religious institution of Shintoism, and also has carried the function of a political symbol of modern Japan. After lunch, the Tillichs took a taxi as always to Meiji Shrine in Harajuku, Tokyo. The visit was arranged by Hideo Kishimoto, the Professor of Religion at University of Tokyo. Kishimoto was a close friend of Professor Joseph Kitagara of Chicago University. Kishimoto checked with him about the information regarding Tillich’s interests from Kitagawa in order to prepare the details of the visit. Kishimoto had set up for Tillich not only an opportunity to observe actual Shinto ceremonies and a meeting with the priests, but also an in-depth discussion with scholars on Shintoism afterwards. For this, the Japan Committee had sent out invitations, besides Tillich and his guide Kishimoto, to Osanaga Kanroji, Tatsumi Date, and Motonori Ono. The committee entrusted the arrangement for Tillich’s visit to Kokugakuin University to Naofusa Hirai, an assistant professor at Kokugakuin. Tillich made the following report on Shintoism: “We have visited the two main shrines, the Meiji shrine in Tokyo and the Ise shrine in the south. The latter is the most sacred, the former the most important politically. Both times we were guided by priests of the shrine. In Tokyo it was quite a solemn occasion. We were brought to the water of purification and entered the inner section of the shrine, saw a colorful wedding, but could not see the innermost part which contains the sacred mirror, and is reserved for

46 On Shintoism, see Ernst Lokowandt, Shintô. Eine Einführung, München 2001. On Meiji Shrine, see Richard Arthur Brabazon Ponsonby-Fane, The Imperial House of Japan, Kyoto 1959.

3 Tillich in Japan from May 3 to July 10, 1960

19

the emperor. Then we were led to a teahouse in a separated garden, had ceremonial tea and 47 a long discussion . . .”

According to the notes taken by Kishimoto, the discussion was on the following points: (1) A major difference between Christianity and Shintoism is in the absence of the consciousness of sin and of the forgiveness of sin on the part of Shintoism, and purification in Shintoism is totally different from the forgiveness of sin in Christianity; (2) The religious function of Shito pantheism is “to maintain the memory of and reverence for the past generations in family and nation”; and (3) The “mitama” (spirits), which are present in shrines to be commemorated and respected, are present not in the sense of immortal soul; rather 48 its closest parallel is found in the “manes” of ancient Rome. The discussion developed to the political function of Shintoism, and whether President Eisenhower should visit Meiji Shrine or not was also discussed. The argument was made against the president’s visit on the grounds that it violated the existing policy since the Directives on State Shinto issued by McArthurled GHQ (SCAPINs-448), as well as the regulation of the Constitution of Japan, which defined the relationship between the state and religion. Tillich’s “Informal Report” reveals Tillich’s fascination with the argument by the Shinto scholars in defense of the president’s visit. It was quite similar to the explanation used in the Greek Orthodox Church concerning the veneration of icons. The argument carefully differentiated veneration from adoration and defended the president’s visit to Meiji Shrine as having no religious significance and would be “mere sightseeing”. Tillich, on the other hand, detected in this argument the evidence 49 of “the original unity between the religious and the national in Shintoism”. Tillich was transferred to the next location, Kokugakuin University, and had another discussion with the scholars on Shintoism. The issues discussed there included the absence of Logos in Shintoism and the consequent nonexistence of a theology as “theo-logos”, the difference between the concept of nature in Shintoism and the western notion of the cosmos, and finally such political issues as whether Shintoism could shoulder democracy in Japan or not.

47 Paul Tillich, Informal Report, 127 below (p. 17 in the printout version). 48 Kishimoto’s notes, in the Tillich collection in the archives of the I-House. See also Paul Tillich, Informal Report, 128 below (p. 17 in the printout version) for the quotation. 49 Paul Tillich, Informal Report, 128 below (p. 18 in the printout version). The official title of GHQ’s so-called “Shinto Directives” is, “Abolition of Governmental Sponsorship, Support, Perpetuation, Control and Dissemination of State Shinto (Kokka Shinto and Jinja Shinto)”, Supreme Commander for the Allied Forces Directives to the Japanese Government (SCAPINs), No. 448, 15.12.1945.

20

A Commentary on Paul Tillich’s Visit to Japan: May 3 – July 10, 1960

Tuesday, May 10: On this day, Tillich had a discussion with the representatives from Buddhism, another religious tradition in Japan. Official invitations were sent out on May 2, and the following people attended the event: Shotetsu Yoshida, Reiho Masunaga, Fumio Masutani, Hajime Nakamura, Joichi Suetsuna, and Koshiro Tamaki. The meeting was arranged by Hajime Nakamura, Professor of Indian Philosophy at University of Tokyo, who made a significant contribution on the establishment of Indian Philosophy and Buddhist Studies as academic 50 disciplines in Japan. The discussion started at 10:00 a.m. with a question from Tillich concerning the basic concepts on Buddhism, and moved to the questions on how far Buddhism could contribute to the postwar democracy of Japan, particularly in light of the students’ participation in the recent political movements, and on if Buddhism could become a spiritual foundation for democracy in Japan at all. Tillich was pessimistic on the latter point, and the discussion ended with no meaningful agreement on the issue. In the afternoon, Tillich visited the Embassy of Federal Republic of Germany 51 via invitation, which was located in Hiroo in Shibuya, Tokyo. At 4:30 p.m., the Japan Committee for Intellectual Interchange hosted an official dinner party, and some 110 people attended. Wednesday, May 11: An informal meeting with Japanese social scientists was scheduled in the afternoon. Kako sent out invitation letters in the name of the 52 Chairman Takagi , which reads: As it has already been notified, our Committee has invited Dr. Paul Tillich, a Harvard University Professor in Theology at the request of many interested persons in the field of theology and philosophy in Japan. Dr. Tillich arrived in Japan with Mrs. Tillich on May 3, and will stay in Japan for about 8 weeks. In order to make necessary preparations for the schedule of Dr. Tillich’s stay in Japan, our Committee has set up both in Tokyo and in Kyoto subcommittees of small a number of members representing the fields of theology, philosophy and sociology. As Dr. Tillich himself, a philosophical theologian, has a great interest in the problem of theology and modern culture, our committee would like to hold an informal meeting with thinkers and social critics who represent the best of learning in Japan today . . . The persons invited to

50 For the information on Hajime Nakamura, see Sengaku Mayeda, Remembering Dr. Hajime Nakamura, in: Philosophy East and West 50/3, July 2000, 4–8. 51 The German Embassy in Hiroo is close to the I-House in Roppongi. 52 The letter is preserved in the Tillich Collection in the archives of the I-House.

3 Tillich in Japan from May 3 to July 10, 1960

53

54

55

21

56

the meeting are as follows: Kiyoko Cho , Yoshie Hotta , Shuichi Kato , Junji Kinoshita , 57 58 59 Masao Maruyama , Shunsuke Tsurumi and Nobushige Ukai .

Those invited were up-and-coming young Japanese intellectuals, who later became famous authors and leading scholars. Gathering together of all those brilliant intellectuals at one place was almost unthinkable in later years. The meeting, which began with lunch, continued well beyond its original closing time at 3:00 p.m., and some even visited Tillich at the I-House privately for follow-up discussions during the following week, which was reserved for Tillich’s off days. The central issues for the discussion were, once again, the issues concerning democracy, the actuality of religious socialism, which Tillich advocated while he was still in Germany, and the nature of liberalism. Although more than one recording of the discussion was preserved, all are in Japanese and thus not included in this publication.

53 Kiyoko (Cho) Takeda (b. June 20, 1917) is Professor Emeritus of International Christian University. Cho received her education at Olivet University, Columbia University, and Union Theological Seminary, and has written numerous books, including “Ningenkan-no Sôkoku” (Conflicting Views of Human Beings), and “Tennôkan-no Sôkoku” (Conflicting Views of the Emperor). 54 Yoshie Hotta (1918–1998) was a Japanese novelist and thinker. 55 Shuichi Kato (1919–2009) was a Japanese literary critic, author and medical doctor. Kato taught at various universities including University of British Columbia, Free University of Berlin, and Sophia University in Tokyo, Japan (http://kshu.web.fc2.com/cv.htm). For the information on Kato, see Shuichi Kato, A Sheep’s Song. A Writer’s Reminiscences of Japan and the World, trans. and annotated by Chia-ning Chang, Berkeley/Los Angeles 1999, esp. “Chronology: Major Events and Publications, 1919–1997”, xv–xxxvi. 56 Junji Kinoshita (1914–2006) was a Japanese playwright and social critic. 57 Masao Maruyama (1914–1996) was a Japanese scholar in political science and professor at University of Tokyo. Maruyama’s own analysis of Japanese politics is found in Masao Maruyama, Thought and Behaviour in Modern Japanese Politics, ed. by Ivan Morris, Oxford 1963. Also, see Rikki Kersten, Democracy in Postwar Japan. Maruyama Masao and the Search for Autonomy, London 1996. 58 Shunsuke Tsurumi (1922–) is a Japanese philosopher, critic and political activist. Tsurumi went to America alone at the age of 15, and the following year in 1938, he entered the philosophy department at Harvard University by the recommendation from his guarantor, Arthur M. Schlesinger, Sr. at Harvard, Tsurumi was influenced by such great figures as Alfred North Whitehead, Bertrand Russell, Willard Quine, and Rudolf Carnap. See also, Interview with Mr. Shunsuke Tsurumi, in: The Japan Foundation Newsletter 31/2, December 2005/January 2006, 1–3 (http://www.jpf.go.jp/e/publish/periodic/jfn/pdf/jfn31_2.pdf). 59 Nobushige Ukai (1906–1987) was a Japanese Legal scholar. Ukai was a professor at University of Tokyo and later became the president of International Christian University. He was also known to have introduced Dag Hammarskjöld to the Japanese public by translating Hammarskjöld’s posthumous work, “Markings” in 1967 (ET: trans. by Leif Sjöberg and W. H. Auden, New York 1964).

22

A Commentary on Paul Tillich’s Visit to Japan: May 3 – July 10, 1960

Thursday, May 12: Tillich’s first lecture in Japan was scheduled on this day. After a meeting with Kako in the morning, Tillich arrived before lunch at the Ikebukuro campus of Rikkyo University (St. Paul’s University), an Anglican university and one of the most famous universities in Japan. Tillich was entertained with a lunch at the office of the President, and then was given a tour of the campus. At 3:00 p.m. Tillich gave a lecture under the title, “The Philosophical Background of My Theology”. The lecture was recorded on tape, and the manuscript of the lecture was preserved in the archives of the I-House, which was a transcription from the recordings with revisions by Tillich’s own hand. The manuscript is collected in this publication. The lecture was arranged by Enkichi Kan, Professor of Systematic Theology at Rikkyo. The lecture was delivered with interpretation, and exceeded three hours in total. While Tillich explained the content of his lecture to his interpreter in advance, actual interpretation was done consecutively, in which Tillich spoke a few sentences first and then the interpreter translated them. That was why it took twice as long as the length of time Tillich spoke. In spite of the length of the lecture, the audience listened to Tillich patiently. Tillich was disappointed that there were only a small number of questions, mostly by old professors and not by undergraduate or graduate students. Having finished his first lecture in Japan successfully, somewhat excited, Tillich attended the dinner party hosted by Professor and Mrs. Kan. Tillich enjoyed the British style dinner, especially the expensive red wine prepared specially for Tillich. Friday, May 13: International House of Japan hosted a special lecture in the evening at the I-House. The title of the lecture was “The Basic Ideas of Religious Socialism”, which was also recorded on tape, and the transcribed lecture with necessary revisions was later published in the bulletin of the I-House (IHJ Bulletin, 6 [1960]). Preceding the lecture, there was a dinner hosted by the Japan Committee for Intellectual Interchange at 6:00 p.m., and the lecture started at 7:15 p.m. Tillich delivered the same lecture later at Tohoku University in Sendai, which was also recorded on tape. When the two recordings were compared, the lecture in Tokyo was more in detail than the lecture in Sendai. Saturday, May 14: On this weekend, at the request of Mrs. Tillich, a “Nodate” style “Cha-no Yu” (outdoor tea ceremony) was held as one of the traditional

3 Tillich in Japan from May 3 to July 10, 1960

23

60

manners of Japan. The tea ceremony was planned at Happô-en in Shirogane, Tokyo. On the way to Happô-en, The Tillichs made a stop at Meiji Gakuin University, which used to have the oldest theological seminary in Japan, and visited the Reischauer’s Memorial Hall, which was built to commemorate August Karl Reischauer, a missionary and the father of Edwin O. Reischauer, a former 61 Ambassador to Japan. The Tillichs arrived at Happo-en at 12:00, noon, and after a Japanese style lunch, the tea ceremony was held in the garden area. While the tea ceremony is an occasion for drinking tea, it is a ceremony with a particular thought, which was developed by Sen no Rikyû during the “Sengoku” period (Warring States period) in Japan. The idea of “Ichi-go ichi-e” (one time, one meeting) is considered to reflect a special Buddhist eschatology, whereas the influence from the Eucharistic liturgy of the Catholic Church upon the tea ceremony is often pointed out. Because the event of drinking tea together here and now can never be repeated or reproduced exactly, this opportunity of serving tea should be taken and materialized with utmost seriousness. Therefore, it is an art of hospitality and a form of fatalism at the same time. Sunday, May 15 to Tuesday, May 17: The Tillich’s enjoyed a few days off, visiting downtown Tokyo and did some shopping. They also had visits from their old friends, as well as new friends from their stay in Tokyo. Tillich went out to Ginza, made observations of amusement quarters at night, and visited pubs where writers gather nightly. Tillich enjoyed the company of English-speaking customers and amazingly expensive aged wine he ordered to share with them. Wednesday, May 18 and Thursday, May 19: Tillich gave lectures for students at the Tokyo YMCA building in Kanda. The lectures were delivered for two days, from 4:30 p.m. to 6:00 p.m. each day. These lectures were reported by the media, including the two largest nation-wide newspapers, Asahi and Yomiuri. No recordings or manuscripts of these lectures were left except for Japanese stenographic notes. Fortunately, Tillich’s own notes for these lectures were discovered in the present investigation, and they are included in this publication.

60 On Japanese tea ceremony, see e. g., Wolfgang Fehrer, Das Japanische Teehaus. Architektur und Zeremonie, Sulgen 2005; Soshitsu Sen, The Spirit of Tea, Kyoto 2003. 61 The origin of Meiji Gakuin University goes back to the oldest private school founded by a missionary couple, Mr. and Mrs. J.C. Hepburn in 1863, which was expanded with the support of the Presbyterian Churches in the United States. The Reischauer’s Memorial Hall was originally the residence of the Reischauers, and later used for many purposes. In 1965, the building was restored and relocated to the Higashimurayama campus of Meiji Gakuin Junior High School/Higashimurayama High School.

24

A Commentary on Paul Tillich’s Visit to Japan: May 3 – July 10, 1960

After the lecture on May 19, the Tillichs were invited to the dinner hosted 62 by Rokuro Hidaka. Friday, May 20 and Saturday, May 21: Although originally a day off, the Tillichs accepted the offer Hidaka made at the dinner the night before and visited the “Nihon Mingeikan” (Japan Folk Crafts Museum) with Hidaka as their guide. Located in the Komaba area of Meguro, Tokyo, the “Mingeikan” Museum is a special museum dedicated to the traditional handcrafted art and was founded by Soetsu Yanagi, who was a religious philosopher, art critic and an advocate 63 of the “Mingei” Movement (Folk Craft Movement). In the “Mingei” Movement, Yanagi sought to redirect people’s attention from mass-produced products to handmade common crafts by anonymous crafts people. In fact, Yanagi defined the beauty and the value of such “Mingei”, including ceramics, textiles, lacquer wares, and wood works from various parts of Japan, as well as those arts and crafts from the Korean Yi Dynasty, which had been undervalued in traditional art history as no match to the Western fine arts or expensive Japanese antiques. Tillich developed a deep respect for Yanagi’s thought and changed his plan so that he could visit the Mingeikan. Tillich made the following recollections of the visit: “We were guests of the director and founder of the famous museum for folk-arts who first showed us the beautiful pieces of crafts from Korea, China and Japan, then after a ceremonial tea had a discussion with me about the influence of religion on the artistic style. He showed us several scrolls influenced by Zen Buddhism, the religion of ‘self-power’ and other scrolls, influenced by Shin Buddhism, the religion of ‘other-power’, and the comparison was very 64 illuminating.”

This seems one of the great intellectual insights Tillich received in Japan, as he details later in his “Informal Report”. At the discussion, Tillich offered Yanagi his well-thought out argument concerning the relationship between religion and culture, or more precisely, between “form” and “content” (Inhalt). Tillich also had a long discussion with Yanagi on

62 Rokuro Hidaka (1917–) is a Japanese sociologist. Hidaka was a former professor at University of Tokyo, and a Marxist with no affiliation with the Communist Party. 63 Soetsu Yanagi (1889–1961) was a Japanese author and religious philosopher, who started the Mingei Movement. For his philosophy, see Soetsu Yanagi, The Unknown Craftsman. A Japanese Insight into Beauty, Tokyo/New York 1989. See also the official home page of the “Mingeikan” (http://www.mingeikan.or.jp/english/index.html). 64 Paul Tillich, Informal Report, 131 below (p. 22 in the printout version).

3 Tillich in Japan from May 3 to July 10, 1960

25

the question of whether or not expressionist art was possible in the context of Eastern art. On May 21, Tillich changed his plan again, this time to enjoy Kabuki at the 65 “Kabuki-za” (Kabuki theater) in Ginza. This visit was arranged by the Japan Committee, and was accompanied by Kazo Kitamori, a renouned theologian 66 famous for his book, “Theology of the Pain of God”. Kitamori gladly assumed the role of a guide, as he was well versed in Kabuki so as to develop his own interpretation of one of the Kabuki stories in the aforementioned book. Kabuki dates back to 1603 in the Edo peirod, when “Izumo no Okuni” introduced a new style of dance drama at the “Kitano-Tenmangû” Shrine in Kyoto. “Okuni” was believed to be a “miko” (a female shaman) at “Izumo Taisha” (the Grand Shrine of Izumo), and developed the latest style of performing art by dancing to the popular songs of her time and by incorporating the behavior of an eccentric person (“kabuki-mono”) into her dancing in male attire. Such Kabuki performances became instantly popular nationwide and inspired many imitators, particularly among prostitutes. This popular style of Kabuki underwent a significant change when female performance was banned on the grounds that it corrupted public morals, and consequently all roles, both male and female, came to be performed by male performers. Kabuki developed further during the Edo period. While major centers of Kabuki remained in the west in Kyoto and Osaka until the late Edo period toward the end of the reign of Ienari Tokugawa (11th “Shogun”, 1787–1837), Edo (Tokyo) in the east started to thrive during the “Genroku” era (1688–1703) as a star actor appeared, who was comparable to that in the west. As Kabuki developed into divergent forms and also declined somewhat during the final years of the Edo period, efforts were made in the Meiji period to restore and reestablish Kabuki to sophisticated performing arts of the Edo period.

65 For the information on Kabuki, see Barbara E. Thornbury, Sukeroku’s Double Identity. The Dramatic Structure of Edo Kabuki, Ann Arbor 1982, and also, James R. Brandon, Kabuki’s Forgotten War: 1931–1945, Honolulu 2008. Japan Arts Council has an informative website on Kabuki. 66 Kazo Kitamori (1916–1998) was a Japanese theologian and the author of Theology of the Pain of God, Richmond 1965; reprint with a foreword by Anri Morimoto, Eugene 2005 (Japanese original published in 1946). For the information on this book and Kitamori’s theology, see John Thomas Hastings, Kitamori Kazoh, in: Scott W. Sanquist (ed.), A Dictionary of Asian Christianity, Grand Rapids 2001, 445–446; Akio Hashimoto, Legacy of Kitamori in Contemporary Japanese Christian Thought, in: Missio Apostolica 12/1, May 2004, 11–16; and Richard Meyer, Toward a Japanese Theology. Kitamori’s Theology of the Pain of God, in: Concordia Theological Monthly 33/5, May 1962, 261–272.

26

A Commentary on Paul Tillich’s Visit to Japan: May 3 – July 10, 1960

Guided by Kitamori, Tillich visited the “Kabuki-za” in Ginza in the morning and enjoyed the performance until evening. On the way back, Tillich stopped at 67 Kyo Bun Kwan, a Christian bookstore in Ginza, and checked the translation copies of his books. Sunday, May 22: Tillich delivered a sermon, at Tokyo Union Church in Harajuku, 68 Tokyo, an interdenominational church with an English-speaking congregation. It was the first sermon Tillich delivered in Japan, and the arrangement for this sermon was made before Tillich’s arrival in Japan. One of the associate pastors of the church was a former student of Tillich at Union Theological Seminary, and through him the arrangement was made for inviting Tillich as a guest preacher 69 for the evening service. The title of Tillich’s sermon was “On Forgetting and Being Forgotten”, which was translated into Japanese and published in the same year in the August issue of “Fukuin-to Sekai” (“The Gospel and The World”), a 70 monthly journal published by Shinkyo Publishing Co., Ltd. After the service, the Tillichs enjoyed tea with the English-speaking congregation for a short period of time, and hastened back to the I-House, for they were to leave for Kyoto the next morning.

3.2 Tillich in Kyoto — From May 23 to June 13 Early in the morning of May 23 (Monday), after a breakfast at the I-House, Tillich and his wife Hannah took a taxi to Tokyo Station. They were to take the 9:00 a.m. limited express train “Tsubame” (swallow) to Kyoto. Today it only takes roughly two hours and 15 minutes between Tokyo and Kyoto by the “Shinkansen” (bullet train). There was no such thing 50 years ago and it was a 71 long journey of some 7 hours.

67 Ginza Kyo Bun Kwan was originally started by missionaries from Methodist Episcopal Church in America as a Methodist Publishing House. 68 Tokyo Union Church is a church established for English-speaking people living in the suburbs of Tokyo, and it is located near Shibuya, one of the newly developed city centers of Tokyo. 69 The letter of invitation is collected in this publication. See p. 178 below. 70 Shinkyo Publishing Co. Ltd. is a leading Protestant publisher, which has been publishing the translation of many writings of theologians associated with the so-called dialectical theology movement. “Fukuin-to Sekai” is a monthly journal with over 60 years of history and the most widely read Christian journal in Japan. 71 The “Shinkansen” began service four years later in 1964, the year of Tokyo Olympic Games.

3 Tillich in Japan from May 3 to July 10, 1960

27

Tillich summarized the three weeks’ visit in Kyoto in his “Informal Report”: “Whoever speaks about Kyoto becomes enthusiastic, and rightly so. With respect to landscape and art treasures, it can be compared with Florence. And equally to Old Florence, it is a center of an intellectual life which is concentrated in the Kyoto and the other universities – Doshisha, Otani, etc. . . . The three weeks in Kyoto were the most interesting time of my stay 72 in Japan, and one of the most intensive times of my life.”

The train left Tokyo Station at 9:00 a.m. and arrived at Kyoto Station at 3:54 p.m. It was almost 5:00 p.m. when the Tillichs finally arrived by taxi at Miyako Hotel, where they had a dinner with the Kyoto members of the Japan Committee. Miyako Hotel was the lodging for the Tillichs during their entire stay in Kyoto, except during short trips to Nara and Ise-Shima. The person who arranged lectures and discussions in Kyoto was Professor Tetsutaro Ariga of Kyoto University, Faculty of Letters. Kyoto University is the only national university in Japan which has a department dedicated to the study of Christianity. The Department of Christian Studies was established in the May of 1922 as the Second Department of Religious Studies (Christian Studies). Ariga assumed the position of full professor for the first time after World War II. Ariga specialized in the history of Christian thought, particularly patristic studies. Having established his standpoint of the study of patristic thought, Ariga investigated the historical contact between Hellenism and Hebraism and discovered as the root of Christian thought a peculiar Hebraic thought, which he coined “hayatologia”, and systematically presented it in his book, “The Problem of Ontology in Christian Thought” (1969). Ariga’s deep interest in Jewish studies from a very early stage of his career probably came from his close attention to the relationship between Hellenism and Hebraism. Tetsutaro Ariga was born in Osaka in the year 1899 to Bunhachiro, his father, and Naka, his mother, as their first son. As the family moved to Tokyo several years later, Ariga graduated from the First Prefectural Middle School in Tokyo, and entered the School of Theology of Doshisha University in Kyoto, Japan. After graduating from the university in 1922, Ariga sought to study abroad and studied at Chicago University, Columbia University, and Union Theological Seminary. Ariga returned to Japan in 1926, and started teaching theology at Doshisha University the same year. In 1935, Ariga went back to Union Theological Seminary and received his Th.D. degree from there. After the war, in 1947, Ariga became the first dean of the Faculty of Theology at Doshisha University under the new system. Then, in 1948, he became a professor at the Faculty of Letters of Kyoto

72 Paul Tillich, Informal Report, 134 below (p. 25 in the printout version).

28

A Commentary on Paul Tillich’s Visit to Japan: May 3 – July 10, 1960

University, as already mentioned. After retiring from Kyoto University, Ariga joined WCC as a representative of Japan, and in 1965, he participated in the 73 Second Vatican Council as a Protestant observer from Japan. Ariga had known Tillich since Tillich’s German years, and he owned an autographed copy of the first edition of “Die sozialistische Entscheidung” (“The 74 Socialist Decision”). As the preparation for Tillich’s visit, Ariga corresponded with Tillich many times and worked hard to make Tillich’s stay in Kyoto substantial and fulfilling both for the Japanese side as well as for Tillich. Ariga made arrangements to alternate lectures and tours of surrounding cities for Tillich, and also scheduled Tillich’s discussions not only with theologians but also with Buddhist scholars in Kyoto. Tuesday, May 24: The Tillichs made a tour of the city of Kyoto in the morning. It is said that there is about 10,000 temples and shrines in Kyoto, the Tillichs were fascinated by the ancient capital. From 4:30 to 6:00 p.m., the Tillichs attended an official reception dinner hosted by the members of the Committee for Intellectual Interchange in Kyoto. Apart from the aforementioned Ariga, who was the representative of the Kyoto 75 Committee, the members were as follows: Professor Shinichi Hisamatsu of 76 Kyoto City University of Arts; Kazuo Muto, Assistant Professor of Christian 77 Studies at Kyoto University; Gajin Nagao, Professor of Buddhist Studies at 78 Kyoto University; Nishitani, Professor of Philosophy at Kyoto University; Setsuji

73 See n. 24 above. 74 Paul Tillich, Die Sozialistische Entscheidung, Potsdam 1933. Later reprinted in Paul Tillich, Christentum und soziale Gestaltung. Frühe Schriften zum Religiösen Sozialismus, Stuttgart 1962 (= Paul Tillich, Gesammelte Werke, vol.2). Japanese translation of “Die sozialistische Entscheidung” was published in 1978 within the translation of “Christentum und soziale Gestaltung” itself by Yasuo Furuya and Teruo Kuribayashi, which was published as the first volume of Japanese version of Tillich’s Gesammelte Werke. English translation, The Socialist Decision, New York 1977, appeared a year before the Japanese by F. Sherman. Airga lectured on Tillich’s “Die Sozialistische Entscheidung” as early as 1934 at Doshisha, according to the recollection of Masatoshi Doi, who was a student at Doshisha at the time; see “Postscripts” in the introductory book he wrote on the person and the thought of Tillich (Masatoshi Doi, Tillich [in Japanese], Tokyo 1960, 239–241, here 239). 75 Shinichi Hisamatsu (1889–1980) was a philosopher and Buddhist scholar, who was greatly influenced by Kitaro Nishida and Daisetz Suzuki. Hisamatsu successively held professorship at Kyoto University, Kyoto City University of Arts, et al. 76 Kazuo Muto (1913–1995) was a Japanese theologian and religious philosopher, who succeeded Ariga at Kyoto University. 77 Gajin Nagao (1907–2005) was a Japanese specialist in Tibetan Buddhism. 78 Keiji Nishitani (1900–1990) was a Japanese philosopher and religious philosopher, who

3 Tillich in Japan from May 3 to July 10, 1960

29

79

Ôtsuka, Professor of Theology at the Doshisha School of Theology; Professor 80 Yoshitaro Shigeru of Doshisha School of Theology; and Yoshinori Takeuchi, Professor of Religious Studies at Kyoto University. Hiroshi Shigeru also joined the company as the secretary to Tillich in Kyoto. Lastly, Yasuharu Hiraba, Professor Emeritus of Kyoto University and an old acquaintance of Tillich, did many things to facilitate Tillich’s stay in Kyoto and lectures at Kyoto University. Wednesday, May 25: Tillich gave an open lecture at 3:00 p.m. at the Faculty of Letters of Kyoto University under the title “Religion and Culture”. The recording of this lecture has been lost, and only stenographic notes in Japanese are extant. While the outline of the lecture is different from the same lecture Tillich delivered in Tokyo, the contents are roughly the same. Thursday, May 26: The Tillichs spent a whole day touring the city of Kyoto. They visited the areas of Sagano and Adashino, and stated that they were deeply moved by the beauty of the bamboo woods and the ancient temples, especially Nisonin and Adashino Nenbutsu-Ji. Friday, May 27: This day marked the beginning of the series of lectures at Kyoto University, which was on the basic ideas and conceptions of Tillich’s religious philosophy. According to the testimonies of the persons concerned, everything was recorded and transcribed. Unfortunately, however, no recording or transcribed English manuscript was located. The Japanese translation from the English manuscript was published in the aforementioned book, “Bunkato Shukyo” (“Culture and Religion”). The title of this lecture series was “The Principles of a Philosophy of Religion”, and the title of the first lecture on May 27 was “The Method of the Philosophy of Religion and the Idea of the Holy”. Quite a few students flocked to these lectures, overflowing from the prepared room each time. Many students even needed to endure listening to Tillich’s

belonged to the so-called Kyoto School. Nishitani was awarded the title of Professor Emeritus at the Faculty of Letters in 1963. For the thought of and information on Nishitani, see Keiji Nishitani, Religion and Nothingness, trans. with Introduction by Jan Van Bragt, Berkeley 1983; Johannes Ernst Seiffert, Weg der Existenz. Zu K. Nishitani: ‘Was ist Religion?’ im Blick auf Gemeinsamkeit und Unterschied von Heideggers Denkweg und Zen, Kassel 2010; and Taitetsu Unno (ed.), The Religious Philosophy of Nishitani Keiji. Encounters with Emptiness, Berkeley 1989. 79 Setsuji Otsuka (1887–1977) was a Japanese theologian. 80 Yoshinori Takeuchi (1913–2002) was a Japanese scholar in religious studies and a Buddhist priest of “Jôdo Shinshû” (Shin Buddhism/Pure Land Buddhism), who was awarded the title of Professor Emeritus at the Faculty of Letters of Kyoto University in 1976.

30

A Commentary on Paul Tillich’s Visit to Japan: May 3 – July 10, 1960

lectures from the hallway and from outside the windows. Tillich reports this experience of giving lectures in Kyoto impressed: “I shall not forget a scene in Kyoto University where some of them listened from outside the overcrowded room through the open windows for more than two hours, putting up umbrellas 81 against the intermittent showers.” Although the lecture was scheduled from 3:00 to 5:00 p.m., the consecutive translation made it almost inevitable for the lecture always to exceed the allotted time and continued even until 6:00 p.m. at times. Saturday, May 28: The Tillichs woke up early and headed for Mount Hiei, a mountain lying over the border of both Kyoto and Shiga prefectures. Needless to say, the purpose of their visit was not mountain climbing, but visiting “Enryaku82 ji” on this mountain. Enryaku-ji is the head-temple complex of the “Tendai” School Buddhism in Japan. The temple complex, stretching across the entire area of Mt. Hiei, was established by a Buddhist priest by the name of Saicho (767– 822) in the early Heian period. Since its opening, “Enryaku-ji” had shared its central position in the Heian Buddhism with “Kongôbu-ji” on Mt. Kôya, the headtemple complex of the “Shingon” School Buddhism. “Enryaku-ji” had produced numerous noted priests: Ennin, who laid the foundation of the “Tendai” School; Hônen of the “Jôdo shû” (Pure Land School); Shinran of the “Jôdo Shinshû” (True Pure Land School); Eizai of the “Rinzai” School; Dôgen of the Sôtô School; and Nichiren of the Nichiren School. Because these towering figures in the history of Japanese Buddhism were all trained here on Mt. Hiei as young monks, it is respectfully called the “mother mountain of Japanese Buddhism”. Tillich visited the temple complex, watched the monks engage in their daily ascetic practices, and discussed with the high-ranking priests and Buddhist scholars. The place was once visited by Rudolf Otto, Tillich’s predecessor at Marburg. Thus, Tillich had hoped to visit this place of Japanese Buddhist faith since his Marburg years. At Enryaku-ji, Tillich explained to the priests and scholars how Otto’s conception of “das Heilige” (the Holy) influenced his understanding of religion, and told them of his anticipation that the direct contact with the reality of Buddhism would bring new elements to his theology, just as it happened to Otto.

81 See p. 117 below (p. 4 in the printout version). 82 On Enryaku-ji, see Paul Gregor, Philosophie in Japan: von den Anfängen bis zur Heian-Zeit. Eine Kritische Untersuchung, München 1993. See also, Paul Groner, Saicho. The Establishment of the Japanese Tendai School, Honolulu 2000; and id., Ryôgen and Mount Hiei. Japanese Tendai in the Tenth Century, Honolulu 2002.

3 Tillich in Japan from May 3 to July 10, 1960

31

Sunday, May 29: Tillich delivered a sermon in the 10:00 a.m. service at the Chapel of Doshisha University in Kyoto city. Doshisha University is a university with the School of Theology in the Congregationalist tradition, and one of the renowned major universities in the west. The sermon was entitled “Time and Eternity”, and later translated by Hideo Kishimoto, Professor of Religion at the University of Tokyo, and published in the July issue of “Sôgô Bunka” (General Culture) in 1960. Although the English manuscript of this sermon exists, it is not collected in this publication because the same sermon is already included 83 in his sermon collection, “Eternal Now”. After the service, Professor Setsuji Otsuka of the Doshisha School of Theology invited the Tillichs for lunch, and after the lunch, the Tillichs headed for Nara by taxi at 2:00 p.m. Nara was another center of Japanese politics and religion more ancient than Kyoto, and Tillich had a good knowledge of the Great 84 Buddha at Nara. After arriving at Nara Hotel, the Tillichs had a relaxed dinner and went to bed early for the following day’s activities. Monday, May 30: The Tillichs toured all day around the temples and facilities related to “Shotoku Taishi” (Prince Shotoku), who was a Japanese Buddhist and 85 a political leader in the late 6th to early 7th century. Tillich was particularly interested in the Buddhist architecture, and pondered upon the religious power of the statues of Buddha. Tuesday, May 31: The Tillichs left Nara Hotel and went to Tenri City. Tenri is a city of Tenrikyo, a Japanese religious group that emerged during the late Edo period, which is broadly categorized within new religious movement (NRM). In Tenri, the Tillichs toured around not only the religious facilities of Tenrikyo, but also Tenri University and the attached Tenri Central Library which contains the world renowned collection of religious and philosophical literature of the 86 world. After the tour, the Tillichs returned to the Miyako Hotel in Kyoto.

83 The sermon is under the title “Eternal Now” in Paul Tillich, Eternal Now, New York 1963. 84 On the history of Buddhism in Nara, see Daigan and Alicia Matsunaga, Foundation of Japanese Buddhism. Vol. 1: The Aristocratic Age, Los Angeles/Tokyo 1974. 85 On the Prince Shotoku, see Alexander C. Soper, Pictorial Biography of Prince Shotoku, in: Metropolitan Museum of Art Bulletin, New Series 25/5, 1967, 197–215. After hearing the explanation on the Prince Shotoku, Tillich responded by saying that it was a Buddhist theocracy in Japan (the Tillich collection in the archives of the I-House). 86 On Tenrikyo and Tenri Central Library, see Henry van Straelen, The Religion of Divine Wisdom. Japan’s Most Powerful Religious Movement, in: Asian Folklore Studies 13, 1954, 1–192 (2nd, enl. ed. from Kyoto 1957).

32

A Commentary on Paul Tillich’s Visit to Japan: May 3 – July 10, 1960

Wednesday, June 1: Tillich gave the second lecture of the lecture series on “Philosophy of Religion” from 10:00 a.m. to 12:00 noon. The title of the second lecture was “The Dynamics of the Holy and Religious Symbols”. In the afternoon, the Tillichs were invited by Professor Shinichi Hisamatsu to his home for dinner. Tillich had known Hisamatsu’s argument of the “Oriental Nothingness” through his writings, and also known him personally since 1957, when Hisamatsu was a visiting professor at Harvard Divinity School. Hisamatsu entered Kyoto Imperial University in 1912, and studied Eastern philosophy, Buddhism and Japanese thought under the influence of Kitaro Nishida’s philosophy and Daisetz Suzuki’s Zen Buddhism. Hisamatsu became professor at Rinzaishû University (present-day Hanazono University) in 1919, and in 1929 he became professor at Ryûkoku University as well. After the Second World War, Hisamatsu became professor at Kyoto University in 1946, and since his retirement from Kyoto University in 1953, he had been professor at Kyoto City University of Arts. Tillich and Hisamatsu had a long and engaged discussion on Zen and Nothingness. As Tillich was leaving, he was given a farewell gift of Japanese calligraphy of the symbol for “Nothingness” written on a paper with ink made from lampblack. Thursday, June 2: It was a day off for the Tillichs, and they enjoyed shopping 87 and visited the birthplace of Kabuki in Kyoto. In the evening, at the invitation of an anonymous philanthropist, who ran a publishing company in Kyoto, the Tillichs experienced a dinner with geisha entertainment. The experience of geisha entertainment was on the list of Tillich’s request to the Japan Committee, but the Committee was not able to incorporate it into their plan because it would have exceeded the budget. The philanthropist’s generous offer made it possible. Based on the experience of this occasion, Tillich explains “the institution of geishas” as “social entertainers, for individuals or groups, well-organized according to a kind of hierarchy and local distinctions, very expensive, often unattainable, maintaining a dying tradition, in which beauty and tragedy were mixed. (This was the information we received from the friends who organized 88 and shared our own geisha party).” Friday, June 3: The third lecture of the lecture series at Kyoto University was held at 3:00 p.m., under the title, “Symbols of Religion”.

87 Kyoto Kabuki and Tokyo (Edo) Kabuki do not share the same tradition. See Laurence Senelick, The Changing Room. Sex, Drug, and Theatre, London 2000. 88 See p. 134 below (p. 25 in the printout version).

3 Tillich in Japan from May 3 to July 10, 1960

33

After the lecture, the President of the University hosted a dinner party at 6:00 p.m. in the Memorial Hall of the University, with all the members of the Faculty of Letters were invited. While well prepared traditional Kyoto cuisine was served, the food, as impressive as it might be, was no match for the engaging discussion Tillich had on the topic of Zen with two prominent professors: Professor Keiji Nishitani and Professor Yoshinori Takeuchi, who contributed an essay to “Shûkyo-to Bunka”, which was the Festschrift to Tillich on his 70th birthday. This discussion quickly developed into a plan for the panel discussion with Buddhist scholars. Saturday, June 4 and Sunday, June 5: The Tillichs made an excursion to Ise Grand Shrine. On Saturday, the Tillichs went to the Ujiyamada area of Ise City in 89 the morning and had a tour of Ise Shrine. Ise Grand Shrine is one of the most significant shrines for Japanese Shintoism, and Tillich had a discussion with the priests of the shrine on the relationship between “nature” and “religion” in Japan. The Tillichs stayed at Shima Kanko Hotel that day. On June 5, they went sightseeing in the Ise area and returned to Kyoto in the evening. Monday, June 6: The following day was a busy day for Tillich. In the morning, from 10:40 a.m. to 12:00 noon, Tillich gave a lecture to the students at Doshisha Theological Seminary under the title “Significance of Existentialism for Theology”. This lecture was delivered again in Tokyo under a different title. Regrettably, no English manuscript or recording of this lecture remains. After the lecture, Tillich had lunch with the faculty members of the seminary. At 3:00 p.m., Tillich participated in a panel discussion with the faculty members and students of the Department of Buddhist Studies at Otani University, which was established as a Shin Buddhist university (Jôdo Shinshû). The idea of this panel discussion was occasioned by the discussion during the dinner at Kyoto University on June 3. The necessary arrangements for the panel discussion were made, on short notice, by two faculty members of Kyoto University: Professor Ariga and Sakae Kobayashi, who was a lecturer on Christian Studies. The discussion was recorded on tape, which was prepared into a manuscript, and was published later in the May issue of “Japanese Religions” in the following year 90 (1961).

89 Ise Grand Shrine is one of the most significant Shinto Shrines in Japan, which enshrines “Amatarasu-Ômikami” (the Sun Goddess). See Taryo Obayashi/Yoshio Watanabe, Ise und Izumo. Die Schreine des Schintoismus, Freiburg im Breisgau et al. 1982. 90 See pp. 93–97 below; Robert W. Wood (ed.), Tillich Encounters Japan, in: Japanese Religions

34

A Commentary on Paul Tillich’s Visit to Japan: May 3 – July 10, 1960

Tuesday, June 7: In the morning, Tillich participated in the panel discussion sponsored by the Christian Center for the Study of Japanese Religions, which was later published in “Japanese Religions” in 1961. This discussion collected in this publication is a reprint of the journal edition. Tillich led the discussion with a brief opening presentation entitled, “On the Demonic”. The content of the presentation was written down and summarized by the interpreter, which is 91 now reprinted in this publication below. Following the discussion in the morning, another discussion with the members of the faculties of philosophy and theology of Kyoto University was held from 2:00 to 5:00 p.m. Although the record indicates that this discussion in the afternoon was also recorded on tapes, nothing has been discovered as of today, and the contents of the discussion are unknown. The only thing discovered was a photograph taken during the discussion, which shows that Tillich had a relaxed discussion with a small number of scholars in a conference room at Kyoto University. Wednesday, June 8: At 10:40 a.m., Tillich delivered a lecture on “The Spiritual Foundation of Democracy” at Doshisha School of Theology. This was a condensed version of the two-part lecture Tillich delivered back in Tokyo. Thursday, June 9: The Tillichs left Kyoto to visit Kwansei Gakuin University in Hyogo Prefecture. This Methodist university is also one of the best known (private?) universities in Western Japan, just as Doshisha University. At Kwansei Gakuin, Tillich delivered the lecture, “Significance of Existentialism for Theology”, which was the same lecture he gave at Doshisha. Following the lecture, the Tillichs visited Kobe Chinatown and also enjoyed fellowship with members 92 of Kobe German Society. Friday, June 10: Tillich delivered a lecture under the title, “God as Reality and Symbol”, which was the fourth and the last lecture of the lecture-series at Kyoto University.

2/2-3, May 1961, 48–71 (June 6 discussion in 48–55, and June 7 discussion in 55–71); and a Japanese summary by Ken Tsuji is found in 72–75. 91 See pp. 98–109 below. 92 Kobe is one of the top three areas with German population in Japan, the other two being Tokyo and Yokohama. Kobe is also known as the place where the Jewish refugees from Germany came through Siberia and Shanghai stayed on their ways to America and other countries during the Second World War.

3 Tillich in Japan from May 3 to July 10, 1960

35

Saturday, June 11: The Tillichs visited the pottery studio of Kanjiro Kawai through the introduction of Sôetsu Yanagi. Kawai was one of the artists who, together with Yanagi, launched the Mingei Movement, and is particularly known for his pioneering efforts after the Second World War to open up new possibilities to the traditional world of pottery. The Tillichs were welcomed with the ceremonial tea served in one of Kawai’s own pottery pieces, and had lunch with Kawai. Sunday, June 12: This was a day off for the Tillichs. They had scheduled a visit to a temple of one of the esoteric branches of Buddhism in the afternoon to see an exhibition of old Buddhist paintings. The person who received the Tillichs at 93 the temple was Kosho Ôtani, who was a priest in one of Jôdo Shinshû groups. The interpreter for the luncheon was Richard DeMartino, who studied under Shinichi Hisamatsu. Following the luncheon, they had a long discussion on the religious views of human beings. Tillich considered the discussion significant enough to schedule a sequel, which was realized later while the Tillichs were in Karuizawa during their vacation toward the end of their stay in Japan. In the evening, the Kyoto members of the Japan Committee for Intellectual Interchange hosted a farewell party for the Tillichs. The Tillichs were given a farewell gift of a sheet of specially prepared “washi”, traditional Japanese paper, on which everyone in the committee wrote down his name both in Japanese and in English. This gift of washi is preserved in the Tillich Collection housed in the Andover-Harvard Theological Library of Harvard Divinity School. Monday, June 13: In the morning, the Tillichs left Kyoto and retuned to Tokyo by train. They took a 9:32 a.m. special limited train “Tsubame” from Kyoto Station, and arrived at Tokyo Station at 3:30 p.m. The Tillichs took a taxi to the I-House. According to Ms. Kako’s memo, the cost of the Tillichs’ Kyoto stay was 323,724 yen, not including the lodging, daily allowances and honorarium for 94 lectures.

93 Kosho Otani (1925–1999) once stayed at Tillich’s house for a year when he studied at Columbia University. He helped arrange the discussion at Otani University. Ôtani’s mother, who was a sister of the Empress Kôjun, the wife of the Emperor Shôwa. See Paul Tillich, Informal Report, 124 below (pp. 12–13 in the printout version). 94 The memo is in the Tillich Collection at the I-House archives.

36

A Commentary on Paul Tillich’s Visit to Japan: May 3 – July 10, 1960

3.3 Tillich in Tokyo (Part 2): From June 14 to July 10 On Tuesday, June 14, the Tillichs took a day off, and resumed their active schedule of lectures and discussions on the following day. Wednesday, June 15 became truly an unforgettable day for Tillich. Tillich was scheduled to give a lecture at University of Tokyo at 3:00 p.m. The arrangements of the lecture 95 were made by Professor Goro Maeda, who also made arrangements for the broadcasting of the lecture in an NHK radio program with Professor Maeda’s commentary for three days. Tillich prepared a lecture under the title, “Religion and Culture”, which was different in content from the lecture he gave in Kyoto under the same title. The day of Tillich’s scheduled lecture at University of Tokyo became the center of focus not only of the University community, but also of entire Japan. On the evening of June 15, a University of Tokyo student named Ms. Michiko Kanba was killed in front of the Diet Building during the violent crush between the riot police and the student demonstrators demanding the resignation of the Kishi cabinet who heavy-handedly steamrolled the security treaty through the 96 Diet on May 19. Marking the peak of the anti-Security Treaty movement of the 1960’s, the incident forced the Japanese to face the reality of the student political movement. In the afternoon of this day Tillich delivered a lecture at University of Tokyo on “Religion and Culture”. Commenting on this incident, and by quoting the famous phrase, “no longer . . . in a postwar period”, which was in the subtitle of the 1956 “Keizaihakusho” of the Economic Planning Agency of the Prime Minister’s Office, Tillich stated that “the postwar political situation and the U.S.-Japan relationship entered a new stage”. Tillich was more interested in how this student political movement was understood and received by university professors and church leaders than the movement itself. This led Tillich to speak repeatedly of the issue, “Who would shoulder democracy in the postwar Japan?” Following the lecture, the Tillichs were invited for dinner at 6:00 p.m. at the “Kaitoku-kan” building of the university.

95 Goro Maeda (1915–1980) was a Japanese Biblical scholar and one of prominent teachers in the “Mukyokai” groups. Maeda was a professor at University of Tokyo. 96 The Asahi Shimbun ran a two-page special article on this incident on June 17, 1960. (See also an English column on Ms. Kanba on June 16, 2010, VOX POPULI: Michiko Kanba and the ‘Anpo’ demonstrations [http://www.asahi.com/english/TKY201006150314.html].) The bill was first steamrolled at the special committee for the Security Treaty on May 19, and then at the plenary session of the House of Representatives on the following day.

3 Tillich in Japan from May 3 to July 10, 1960

37

Thursday, June 16: Scholars in the field of philosophy and theology gathered together at the International House of Japan at 2:00 p.m. for the seminar under the title, “The philosophy and Theology of Professor Tillich”, which was followed by a dinner. The participants in the seminar were the following: Kiyoko Cho, Yoshimitsu Endo, Yasuo Furuya, Norimoto Iino, Enkichi Kan, Shinako Kan, Kenneth Heim, Hideo Kishimoto, Kazo Kitamori, Naomichi Kodaira, Gunzo Kojima, Hidenobu Kuwata, Kyohei Minaga, Takenosuke Miyamoto, Gen Miyata, Akira Miyazaki, Ken Muto, Yoshio Noro, Hiroshi Ômiya, Kayoko Saito, Osamu Sakai, Toshio Sato, Keikichi Shirai, Kiyoko Takagi, Saburo Takahashi, Kan Takeuchi, and Kano Yamamoto. This was a well-prepared and well-organized seminar, in which the participants were asked to submit their questions to Tillich ahead of time in writing either in English (1–2 double-spaced pages) or in Japanese (1.5–3 pages of manuscript paper with squares for 400 characters). The questions submitted in Japanese were translated into English beforehand. In this way, Tillich was given 97 sufficient time to go through them and to prepare answers for them. Friday, June 17: On this day, Hannah Tillich visited “Tôyô Bunko” (Oriental Li98 brary) in Bunkyo ward, Tokyo. Tillich, on the other hand, visited the leaders of two groups of the so-called “Shinkô-Shûkyô” (new religions) in Japan from 2:00 to 5:00 p.m. The first group was “Risshô Kôsei-kai” in Suginami ward, Tokyo, and Tillich had a meeting with its founder Nikkyo Niwano through interpretation 99 by William P. Woodard. The topic of the meeting was on healing. According to the June 20 issue of the “Shinshukyo Shimbun”, the official newspaper of the Federation of New Religious Organizations in Japan, Tillich asked a question, whether the “Risshô Kôsei-kai” perform healing or not. To this Niwano replied,

97 The letter sent to Tillich by Yoshio Noro during the preparation is collected in this publication. See 182 f. below. 98 Tôyô Bunko is a library and research institute specialized in Asian Studies. The library originated in the private library of George Ernest Morrison (1862–1920), who served as political adviser to the Office of the President of the Republic of China. Hisaya Iwasaki of the Mitsubishi Zaibatsu purchased the Morrison’s collection of Western language materials on China and neighboring countries and opened it to public in 1924. The library is undergoing rebuilding and expansion since the April of 2009 to the July of 2011 (http://www.toyo-bunko.or.jp/ToyoBunko-E/index-e.html). 99 Woodard first came to Japan as a missionary, and in the postwar period he served as an interpreter and an officer in the Civil Information and Educational Section of GHQ, and helped develop the religious policies of Japan.

38

A Commentary on Paul Tillich’s Visit to Japan: May 3 – July 10, 1960

saying while the organization had built a hospital to contribute to the healing of the physical body, the healing of the spirit would require religion. Tillich then visited the “Heiwa-kyô” (Homelands of Peace) of “Shûyôdan Hôseikai” in Ikebukuro. Having informed of the Shinto roots of this organization, Tillich put forth the question of whether or not the organization had any dogma. President Idei replied that it had, although not in the sense of Christianity. Tillich pushed the question further by asking what the meaning of “the universe” was to them. Idei replied that it probably meant something similar to what the “Esoteric Buddhism” meant by the term. At 7:00 p.m., Tillich had an interview session for the widely read journal 100 “Sekai” (the World) published by the Iwanami Shoten. The interviewer was 101 Shigeru Nanbara, a prominent political scientist and a former president of the University of Tokyo. Nanbara was also a Christian in the Mukyôkai tradition, and told Tillich that he once attended Tillich’s lecture when he studied in Germany before the war. The interview was published in the August issue of “Sekai” in that year (1960), but no recordings or English transcriptions remain except for the stenographic notes. The interview covered a number of important and interesting topics, such as the relations between politics and religion, culture and religion, or the possibility of democracy in Japan and the relation between religion and democracy. Also the conversation touched upon the death of Ms. Kanba, which developed into the urgent issue of the relationship between Japan and the United States, as well as the issue of who would shoulder democracy in Japan. Saturday, June 18: The Tillichs took the 9:57 train on the Yokosuka Line to 102 Kamakura. The person who received them was Daisetz Suzuki , a renowned Zen master and a Buddhist scholar, whom the Tillichs had known in the United States. Daisetz Teitaro Suzuki was born in 1870 in Kanazawa, Japan. After quitting the Fourth Higher Middle School in Kanazawa (now Kanazawa University), Suzuki taught English for a while, and then, aspiring to further study, he went

100 Cf. Sekai (The World) 8 (1960), 254–264. 101 Shigeru Nanbara (1889–1974) was a political scientist. Nanbara became a professor of the University of Tokyo in 1925 and then served as the president from December of 1945 to March 1950. 102 On Daisetz Suzuki (1870–1966), see Adele S. Alegro, Beatrice Lane Suzuki and Theosophy in Japan, in: Theosophical History 11/3, July 2005, see the memorial issue of The Eastern Buddhist, new series 2/1, 1967 for articles on and tributes to Suzuki, who founded the journal and the Eastern Buddhist Society in 1921 (see esp. “Chronology” in 208–215, and “Bibliography” in 216–229).

39

3 Tillich in Japan from May 3 to July 10, 1960

to Tokyo. Suzuki studied at “Tôkyô Senmon Gakkô” (now Waseda University) and Tokyo Imperial University (now University of Tokyo), and practiced Zen at Engaku-ji in Kamakura. He then moved to the United States with the help of his master Soen Shaku, and wrote many books on Buddhism and Zen in English while doing editorial works of Eastern spiritual literature. After returning to Japan in 1909, Suzuki resided in the “Shôden-an” of “Engaku-ji” and started teaching at “Gakushûin” (now Gakushuin University). In 1911, Suzuki married Beatrice Lane, who was also a researcher of Zen Buddhism, and became professor at Ôtani University and moved to Kyoto in 1921. While Suzuki returned to Kamakura later in his life, still active, he lectured extensively around the world in the 1950’s and lived in the Unites States and taught at many universities, including University of Hawaii, Yale University, Harvard University, Princeton University, and above all at Columbia University as a visiting professor from 1952–57. Tillich met Suzuki in the United States during this period, and both of them looked forward to seeing each other in Japan. Suzuki invited the Tillichs to “Matsuga-oka Bunko”, a library he created in 1941 in the temple complex of “Tôkei-kji”, and practiced Zen meditation together and had a long discussion, as well as lunch and dinner together. Sunday, June 19: Having returned from Kamakura fairly late the previous night, the Tillichs took a rest on this day. 103

Monday, June 20: The Tillichs were invited by Professor Takeshi Saito of the International Christian University to his house for tea. Saito was a devout Christian baptized by Masahisa Uemura, who was one of the most significant pastors and theologians in the nascent Protestant Christianity in Meiji Japan. Saito had long been familiar with Tillich’s writings. 104 Then, at 6:30 p.m., Tillich had an interview with Junichi Kyogoku of the University of Tokyo, a young scholar and a leading political scientist. The 105 interview was a special project for the famous monthly journal, “Chûôkôron”. During the interview, which started after dinner, the death of Ms. Michiko Kanba

103 Takeshi Saito (1887–1982) was a leading Japanese scholar on English Literature and served as Professor of English Literature at the University of Tokyo for many years before joining the faculty of ICU. He was also a member of the Japan Academy. 104 Junichi Kyogoku (b. 1924) is a Japanese political scientist, who was an assistant professor in the Faculty of Law at the time of the interview, and became a professor in 1965. 105 “Chûôkôron” was originally published as a student journal of Ryûkoku University in 1887 under the title, “Hanseikai-zasshi” (Journal for Evaluation Meetings). The journal changed its name to “Chûôkôron” in 1899. While it was regarded ‘liberal’ in its orientation before the Second

40

A Commentary on Paul Tillich’s Visit to Japan: May 3 – July 10, 1960

naturally emerged as an important topic, which happened just a few days earlier. Tillich offered his analysis of the political situation of Japan by relating political issues with the issues of social stratification, and by taking an example from the deadlock of democracy in the Weimar Republic. Tuesday, June 21: Tillich gave a lecture at Tokyo Union Theological Seminary, a leading theological seminary in Japan with the strongest influence of “Barthian” theology in Japan, and the seminary where Kazo Kitamori of the famous “Theology of the Pain of God” was teaching. The Tillichs left the I-House at 7:30 106 a.m. by the car sent by the seminary and headed for Mure in Mitaka. The title of the lecture was, “Theology and Philosophy: Essentialist and Existentialist Philosophies and their Significance for Theology Today”, which was basically the same as the one Tillich gave at Doshisha University on June 6 under a slightly different title. Following the lecture, Tillich had lunch with the faculty and was given a guided tour of the library. Tillich was fascinated by the fact that Karl Barth was read enthusiastically in a seminary in the Far East, and yet in the same seminary there were young students studying Schleiermacher and Troeltsch. Wednesday, June 22: Tillich gave another lecture at Tokyo Union Theological Seminary, this time, under the title, “The Dynamic of Religion and the Structure of the Demonic”. Once again, Tillich had lunch with the faculty, and the discussion on the interpretation of Kierkegaard continued beyond lunchtime and reached 3:00 p.m. The Tillichs returned hastily to the I-House in order to participate in the next event, which was the meeting with a German research group on Asian Studies. Tillich had a short discussion there. It seems that this group won the occasion for the discussion with Tillich after multiple requests to the Japan Committee. Thanks to their effort, the Tillichs were able to enjoy German food in Japan, their first in a long time.

World War, “Chûôkôron” changed its character first as it became a general-interest journal after the war, and then as it was purchased by the Yomiuri Shinbun, a conservative newspaper company. 106 The Mure campus was later sold to the Junior College of Tokyo Woman’s Christian University in 1966, when the seminary moved to its new campus in Osawa, Mitaka, which is adjacent to International Christian University. The Mure campus was sold once again to Hosei University in 2005 for the new campus of its Junior and Senior High School opened in 2007, and the original buildings were all demolished and replaced by new ones. As a result, the building Tillich lectured was no longer extant.

3 Tillich in Japan from May 3 to July 10, 1960

41

Thursday, June 23: The Tillichs were invited to Japan Woman’s University. After the lunch at the “Ôfû Kaikan” (Alumni House of JWU), Tillich gave a lecture from 1:50 to 3:20 p.m. under the title, “Spiritual Foundation of Democracy”, which he had given a few times elsewhere. The interpreter was Professor Shinako Kan of the university. Friday, June 24: The Tillichs visited Mitaka once again, this time, the International Christian University (ICU), which was founded after the Second World 107 War. At ICU, Tillich gave a two-part lecture on “Religion and Culture”. The first part was from 10:30 a.m. to 12:00 noon, and after the intervening lunch break, the second part was from 4:30 to 6:00 p.m. The lecture was later published in English in the “Asian Cultural Studies” 2 (Sep. 1960), which was published by the Institute of Asian Cultural Studies at ICU, which was reprinted in this publication. During the lunch-break, the Tillichs enjoyed a pleasant walk in the vast wooded campus, equipped even with a golf course, which reminded them of beautiful campuses in the United States. After the lecture, the Tillichs were treated with a dinner at the university restaurant located in a wooded area of the campus. While it was a full day for the Tillichs, it was also a day of relief, in which they could freely speak and communicate in English without cumbersome interpretation. That was because everyone at ICU, whether a student of a staff person, not to mention a faculty member, spoke English fluently. Saturday, June 25: At the invitation of the International House of Japan, the 108 Tillichs enjoyed “Bunraku”. The term “Bunraku” was originally used as the name of the theater dedicated to “Ningyô-Jôruri” (the traditional Japanese puppet play), but eventually came to be used equivalently to “Ningyô-Jôruri” itself. The history of Bunraku is traced back to the puppet ensemble theater of “UemuraBunrakuken” in Osaka, which was started by the 19th century puppeteer Uemura of Awaji, Japan. Unfortunately, there is no record of the details of the program the Tillichs watched.

107 Founded in 1949 and officially started in 1953, International Christian University was the first four-year liberal arts college in Japan, which has since been leading liberal arts education in Japan. Emil Brunner was Visiting Professor during the first two years of the University. 108 For the information on “Bunraku”, see Karen Brazell (ed.), Traditional Japanese Theater. An Anthology of Plays, New York 1997, 115–124.

42

A Commentary on Paul Tillich’s Visit to Japan: May 3 – July 10, 1960

3.4 Tillich in Sendai: From June 26 to June 28 On Sunday, June 26, the Tillichs began their three-day visit to Sendai, which was one of the central cities in Tohoku area. They took the 11:00 a.m. express train “Azuma” from Ueno Station, and arrived at Sendai Station at 5:33 p.m. Now it only takes about an hour and a half from Tokyo to Sendai, it took 6 hours and 33 minutes 50 years ago. After such a long train ride, the Tillichs attended a reception dinner by missionaries, pastors, and professors teaching theology or Biblical studies at Christian universities in the area. The person who made arrangement for inviting Tillich to Sendai was Rev. Yoshiaki Toeda of “Sendai Shimin Kyôkai” (Sendai Citizen’s Church). When Rev. Toeda learned of the coming of Tillich to Japan, he coordinated Tohoku University, Miyagi University of Education, Tohoku Gakuin University and National Council of Churches Japan in Sendai to make a request jointly to the Japan Committee for Intellectual Interchange to obtain permission to invite Tillich to Sendai. The Japan Committee accepted the request on the condition that the program in Sendai was limited to one reception and one lecture. Thus, Tillich’s visit to Sendai became a reality. After the reception by Toeda and others, Tillich gave a lecture at “Sendai Kôyô Kaikan” in Sendai City. The title of the lecture was “Encounters of World Religions”, and only the Japanese record of the lecture remains. Preceding the lecture, there was a performance of Japanese traditional dance by three ladies with the accompaniment by Japanese traditional instruments. Tillich and Hannah both showed great interest in the performance, and Tillich looked somewhat excited when he began speaking, according to the record. The Tillich stayed at Central Hotel in Sendai. Monday, June 27: From 9:00 a.m. to 2:00 p.m., the Tillichs visited Matsushima, a famous tourist spot for the visitors to Sendai. Matsushima is an area ranked as one of the Three Views of Japan, consisting of some 260 small islands both inside and outside the Matsushima Bay. Because of the beauty, Matsushima has been the source of inspiration for paintings and literature to many artists from all over Japan. Tillich returned to Sendai at 3:00 p.m. and gave another lecture under the title, “The Basic Ideas of Religious Socialism” at Tohoku University, which he had already given both in Tokyo and in Kyoto. Tohoku University was a university established by Meiji Government in 1907 under the name Tohoku Imperial University. The plan started in 1900, when the 14th session of the Imperial Diet adopted “The Resolution to Establish Imperial Universities in Kyushu and Tohoku”. Following the adoption of the

3 Tillich in Japan from May 3 to July 10, 1960

43

resolution, the Diet made an official demand to the government to establish an Imperial University in the Tohoku region, but the plan did not progress for several years because of the lack of funds on the side of the government. The situation changed in 1906, when a generous donation came from Furukawa Zaibatsu, who made a fortune during the boom of the Russo-Japanese War. Thus, the university was established in 1907 through part of the donation from Furukawa and the donation from Miyagi Prefecture. Tohoku University has contributed greatly to the study of philosophy and religion in Japan, partly due to the influence of Karl Löwith, who once taught at Tohoku Imperial University while he was in exile in Japan after having been virtually expelled from Germany 109 under the Nazi regime. Following the lecture, the Tillichs received an invitation by Toshio 110 Kurokawa, who was the President of the university and a professor at the Faculty of Medicine. Kurokawa once studied at the Faculty of Medicine of the University of Vienna, and this pleased the Tillichs. Monday, June 28: The Tillichs spent most of the day in the train on their way back to Tokyo. They left Sendai Station at 11:20 a.m. by the express train “Hatsukari” and arrived at Tokyo Station at 4:30. The Tillichs returned to the I-House by taxi.

3.5 The Final Lecture in Tokyo Wednesday, June 29: Tillich delivered his final lecture, “God as Reality and Symbol”, at Tokyo Woman’s Christian University from 10:40 a.m. to 12:00 noon. Although the lecture overlapped in part with the lecture series at Kyoto University, it was nonetheless a stand-alone lecture Tillich prepared for this occasion. This final lecture is also collected in this publication, having been published originally in “Essays and Studies by Members of Tokyo Woman’s Christian College” 11/2 (March, 1961). Tokyo Woman’s Christian University was an institution of higher education for women, established under the resolution adopted at the 1910 World Mis-

109 Löwith was a professor at Tohoku Imperial University from 1936 and was forced to leave Japan in 1941, when Japan became an ally of Nazi Germany. For the information on Löwith’s exile in Japan, see Karl Löwith, Mein Leben in Deutschland vor und nach 1933. Ein Bericht, with a foreword by Reinhart Kosellek, ed. by Frank-Rutger Hausmann, Stuttgart 2007, original ed. 1986. 110 Toshio Kurokawa (1897–1988) was a Japanese medical doctor and a researcher in clinical medicine.

44

A Commentary on Paul Tillich’s Visit to Japan: May 3 – July 10, 1960

sionary Conference held at Edinburgh, Scotland, and with the support from the Protestant churches in North America. The lecture was of the Takeshi Saito Lectureship, which was created by Saito himself at his retirement from presidency in 1954. Having retired from his position of Professor of English Literature at University of Tokyo in 1947, Saito became the Fourth President of Tokyo Woman’s Christian University in 1948. As he retired from presidency, Saito donated his retirement money and other funds to the university for the purpose of inviting prominent scholars for lectures both from inside Japan and from abroad. Tillich had already had tea at Saito’s home before. After the lecture, the Tillichs, together with Saito and others, moved to Shinjuku, and attended a dinner hosted by “Shinkyô Shuppan-sha”, a Protestant publisher who published Japanese translation of Tillich’s books. Along with Saito, at the dinner were Norie Akiyama, the president of Shinkyo Publishing Company and a member of Shinanomachi Church, and the theologians and pastors who were related to the church. The participants celebrated together the successful completion of all the scheduled events of Tillich’s visit in Japan.

3.6 Vacation in Japan Thursday, June 30: The Tillichs visited Nikko, a famous tourist spot in the Northern Kanto area. Nikko is not only a tourist spot of scenic beauty, it is also the location of the Mausoleum of Ieyasu Tokugawa, who founded the Tokugawa Shogunate. The famous “Tôshô-gû” Shrine was erected in 1617 to enshrine the deified spirit of Ieyasu. The “Tôshô-gû” Shrine is part of the 100 historic buildings and structures of Shinto shrines and Buddhist temples which UNESCO listed as a World Heritage Site in 1999. The Tillichs toured the historic buildings centered round the “Tôshô-gû”, and returned to Tokyo the same day. Friday, July 1 and Saturday, July 2: The Tillichs spent these two days winding up their works in Japan and getting ready for their return to America. During the two-day period, Tillich had short meetings and interviews with scholars and journalists he met in Japan. Sunday, July 3 to Friday, July 8: The Tillichs had a six-day vacation in Karuizawa, a famous summer resort in central Japan. Karuizawa was discovered in the late 19th century by an Anglican missionary, Alexander Croft Show, as a suitable place to avoid the summer heat of Tokyo. Karuizawa developed into one of the most favored areas for the summerhouses of upper-class people, as well

3 Tillich in Japan from May 3 to July 10, 1960

45

as a major summer resort for the populace. The Tillichs stayed at the Mampei Hotel Karuizawa and relaxed after the two months of long and hard schedule. Thursday, July 7 was an exception. Tillich had a discussion session with the Buddhist scholars from the Otani School. They were Kosho Otani and his friends, who adjusted their schedule to visit Tillich at Karuizawa to fulfill the promise they made for the follow-up session in Kyoto. The discussion was tape-recorded and later published in the journal of the Otani School, “Kyôka Kenkyû” (vol. 30) 111 in Japanese. The Tillichs returned to Tokyo in the afternoon of July 8, and spent the following day of Saturday, July 9 packing their things. The books and souvenirs they received from friends and people during their stay in Japan far exceeded the capacity of their suitcases, and were packed in six boxes to be shipped separately. Sunday, July 10: The Japan committee hosted a farewell dinner for the Tillichs. Tillich addressed the members in Japanese, which he learned during his time in Japan, and said: “Minasan-no Shinsetsu-ni Kokoro-kara Kansha-shimasu” (I thank you from my heart for your kindness). After the dinner, the Tillichs took a rest in their room for a while, and then took a taxi to Haneda Airport. The Tillichs left Japan on the 11:59 flight (Flight 2) of Pan-America Airlines to Honolulu. They spent another three weeks in Honolulu for vacation and returned home via San Francisco, just as they did when coming to Japan. There were 27 newspaper articles written on Tilllich’s visit in Japan. Also, his lectures, interviews and sermons were published in Japanese. Later in 1962, these lectures were put together in a single volume and published under the tile, “Shukyo-to Bunka” (Religion and Culture). Numerous pictures of Tillich were taken, and many scholars put in writings their impressions of Tillich. According to the Japan Committee, the sum total of the expense for Tillich’s stay was 1,221,901 yen. Tillich himself concludes his “Informal Report” with the following words: “I am grateful to the Japanese friends who worked for a long time to make my

111 “Kyôka Kenkû” is a journal published from the “Kyôgaku Kenkûjo” (the research institute of the doctrine) of the Otani School. There is a complicated history in the Otani School in the years following Tillich’s visit in Japan. Kosho Otani left the Otani School and formed a separate group called Jodoshin sect Higashi-honganji-ha (Higashi-honganji School) in 1988.

46

A Commentary on Paul Tillich’s Visit to Japan: May 3 – July 10, 1960

trip and this insight possible. I can tell them that I have learned to love Japan 112 and her people.” The Tillichs kept contact with Mr. and Mrs. Matsumoto and other friends they met in Japan. The International House of Japan keeps the letter from Hannah Tillich informing of the death of Tillich in the October of 1965, as well as the letter and other documents relating to the final interment of his ashes in the Paul Tillich Park in New Harmony, Indiana in the May of 1966.

4 The Material Collected in this Publication Chapter 1 collects all the lectures, of which the English transcriptions were made from the original recordings. Some of these lectures were subsequently translated into Japanese and published in several Japanese journals over the years 1960 and 1961. The discussion at Otani University was also made accessible to a 113 larger audience in the publication “Japanese Religions” in Kyoto, 1961. The lecture delivered on May 18 and 19 at YMCA Tokyo, “Spiritual Foundation of Democracy”, however,is published for the first time in the present volume. Tillich delivered 17 lectures and sermons in total, which were spoken either freely or from memos of just a few sentences. While Tillich had preparatory meetings with his interpreters, no manuscript is left for any of the lectures or sermons. As a result, unfortunately, only 4 lectures are collected in their 114 complete form in this English publication . While the lectures in the Japanese publication of “Religion and Culture” are all translations from English, they are either translations from the recordings or stenographic notes of the interpreter’s 115 Japanese translation , and no original English text has been discovered at this time. On the other hand, there is a testimony from persons concerned that the lecture series at Kyoto University on religious philosophy was transcribed into

112 Paul Tillich, Informal Report, 134 f. below (p. 26 in the printout version). 113 The bibliographical data can be found in: Renate Albrecht (ed.), Register, Bibliographie und Textgeschichte zu den gesammelten Werken von Paul Tillich, Stuttgart 1975 (= Gesammelte Werke, vol. 14), 103–195. 114 Cf. 1) The Philosophical Background of My Theology, 2) The Basic Ideas of Religious Socialism, 3) Religion and Culture, 4) God as Reality and Symbol 115 Cf. 1) Philosophical Backgrund of My Theology, 2) Religion and Culture, 3) Principles pf a Philosophy of religion Part 1.–4., 4) Significance of Existentialism for Theology, 5) The Basic Ideas of Religious Socialism, 6) Spiritual Foundations of Democracy, Part1.–2., 7) Religion and Culture 2, 8) The Dynamics of religion and the Structure of the Demonic, 9) Encounters of World Religions, 10) God as Reality and Symbol, 11) Informal Report on Lecture Trip to Japan

4 The Material Collected in this Publication

47

English manuscripts. Although no manuscript has been discovered to date, there is a possibility of future discovery of the manuscript. Chapter 2 consists of manuscripts made from the stenographic notes of the discussions and dialogues Tillich had with the Buddhist scholars and priests. These notes were later edited into a single journal article and published in the 116 May 1961 issue of “Japanese Religions”. The manuscripts in this publication are full versions reproduced from the original stenographic notes. Chapter 3 is the “Informal Report” Tillich wrote after he returned from Japan for his friends. The report was translated into German and published in 117 “Gesammelte Werke”. An abridged version is contained in Hannah Tillich’s 118 “From Place to Place”. The text in this publication is the original English text of the Report archived in the International House of Japan, which was sent from Tillich himself. Chapter 4 collects all the available letters related to Tillich’s lecture trip to Japan in 1960, which were kept in the International House of Japan in Tokyo and in the Ariga Tetsutaro Collection of the Kyoto University Archives.

116 Robert W. Wood (ed.), Tillich Encounters Japan, in: Japanese Religions 2/2-3, May 1961, 48–71. 117 Paul Tillich: Meine Vortragsreise nach Japan 1960, in: Paul Tillich, Impressionen und Reflexionen. Ein Lebensbild in Aufsätzen, Reden und Stellungnahmen, ed. by Renate Albrecht, Stuttgart 1972 (= Paul Tillich, Gesammelte Werke, vol. 13), 490–517. 118 Hannah Tillich, n. 4, 93–115.

Part A: Lectures

The Philosophical Background of My Theology Mr. President, Professor Ken, ladies and gentleman: It is a great honor for me that the first lecture in this country is a lecture on my theology. And I must tell you that to sit down and to think about myself, so to speak, make myself into an object to myself; and I don’t think you can do that very objectively. But perhaps you can do it somehow existentially. It demands a kind of self-objectivation which might not be very objective, but done with “existential” participation in myself. I want, first, to make some historical remarks about my relationship to philosophy, and then show how this relationship, which was a relationship with many philosophers has influenced my theological thought. So the lecture has two main parts: historical section and the more systematic.

Historical Remarks I remember the tremendous impression I received when I first read the fragments of the so-called pre-Socratics, the oldest Greek philosophers, the beginning of all philosophy of the Western world, which are given to us only in fragments. But I had the feeling that in these fragments there is more content and more profundity than in most of the following philosophical attempts. I was grasped by their profound tragic feeling about men’s finitude and foolishness, their archaic style like Cyclopean walls. – It had for me the image of old walls which are put together by did stones without mortar, as you find it in the earliest period of all history. They have a mysterious character, as mysterious as the smiling of the archaic gods and goddesses, At the same time, they had a tremendous power of abstraction. Here for the first time in western history, the concept being arose, especially in the philosophy of Parmenides. And where there is the concept of being, there is also the concept of non-being. And I still feel how my whole relationship to life was changed under the impression of these man. Next one I want to mention, on whom I am dependent all my life and again in many periods of my life, is Plato. For Plato or Platon, (perhaps you share the German pronunciation which is at the same time the original Greek pronunciation, so I don’t need to corrupt the Greek as I have to do in America) I choose only two points out of the infinite richness of Plato’s thinking: the distinction of the world of ideas or essences which is the world of truth and the world of seeming reality (which is the world that seems to be truth but which is not truth.) This distinction which is expressed by Plato in the myth of the “fall” of the soul from the world of the eternal images into the world

52

The Philosophical Background of My Theology

of changing reality. And what is left in us is what one could call the “transhistorical memory”, the remembrance beyond time and space of the world to which the soul once belonged. And the other point of Plato I want to make is his use of myths and symbols, when appearing existentially. (When he speaks about the transition from the world of essences to the world of existence, the world of Truth to the world of seeming truth; or when he speaks of the return to the soul, out of the world of time and space in which we are living to the world beyond time and space. – Then Plato uses symbols and myths and not concepts; and this means when you speak about the relation of essence and existence, you cannot use concepts; you must do it in symbols.) The third I want to mention are the Stoics. For many reasons they must be mentioned. I felt, for a long time, in Europe and now since I came here, in this country, too, that the decisive alternative to Christianity is stoicism. The secular Stoicism which had many forms in our time, but which was created toward the end of the Greek development. The main point of the Stoic philosophy to which I want to refer is the doctrine of the logos, the word, the reason, however it may be translated; probably in the Indian terms, the nearest would be dharma. This power which is present both in the human mind and in the world as a whole, which makes it possible that men can ask and act ethnically according to the laws of nature in his own mind. This great idea of logos – or, if I am not mistaken, dharma – unites man and the world he encounters, has as you know, been received by Christian theology and has become the foundation of Christian theology. When the Christ was called the “logos” then Christian theology started. And therefore, this concept is of the greatest importance; and it should not ever have been lost in theology; and the historic doctrine of the natural law in the physical world, as well as in the human mind – the logos doctrine – is a philosophical element which is deeply rooted in all Christian thinking. The last school of Greek philosophy I want to mention are the Neo- Platonics. Here something has happened which has bought Western thought nearer to Eastern thought than it was ever before, namely, the union of the relational and the mystical, as it is present in the founder of this school, Plotinus and in all his great pupils. One of the most important concepts Plotinus has developed is the concept of “ecstacy”, which means going beyond oneself without losing oneself. And the interesting thing is that Plotinus never doubted that the whole system of reason – and he was as logically founded as any present-day logical positivist – that the whole system of reason finally leads to some point in which reason not denies itself, not abdicates, but transcends itself within itself. And this he called, “ecstacy”. And this concept is one of those I have taken in my theology, and for which I have often been accused of being a “bad man”, namely, a “mystic”. And now I come to Western philosophy as it developed under Christian

Historical Remarks

53

influence. And I here immediately go to Augustine whom I consider to be the greatest figure in the ancient Church, and in whom two different lines of thought were beginning, which went through all Western philosophy ever since. (And let me deal with these two lines of thought.) The one which derived from the idea of infinity. In Greek thinking finiteness is the highest and not infinite. Infinity is something bad, and therefore, the Greeks tried to resist the idea of the infinity of space. But with Christianity, the concept of infinity was applied to God. And in this way, this concept was made the highest quality of the highest. And out of this problem, developed the first line which can be called the line of “immeduate religious experience”. Augustine lived in a time in which skepticism had conquered all the Greek thinking. And he himself went through a period of skepticism. But he overcame this skepticism with the experience that in the depths of the soul – of one’s own soul – the Truth is dwelling, (that it is to be found in one’s own soul.) And out of this the possibility came again and again in the Western world to overcome doubt by looking into oneself. And this was even the case with a man like Descartes, the founder of modern philosophy, who comes in this respect from the Augustinian tradition; and who found the truth, also, within himself. It was, also, in a man who has influenced me especially, the Cardinal Nicolaus Cusanus, of the Roman Church in the fifteenth Century; who expressed the principle of the coincidence, or the falling together of the infinite and the finite, partly in mathematical, partly in philosophical terms. This unity of the infinite and the finite has become one of the fundamental principles of my doctrine of religious experience. And here I feel much relatedness to many forms of Eastern thought. But this line of thought, the coincidence of the infinite and the finite, has also its dangers. It can give man the feeling that he sits, so to speak, in the center of the infinite itself. And this was the danger which came out most fully in German classic philosophy. And here especially in Hegel. And in Hegel especially in his interpretation of history. They are present in the mind of the philosopher, and so the philosopher knows what history is. Now this was, I would call it with a Greek word – hubris – philosophical arrogance, because history always transcends beyond anything we know; it has in itself the element of the incalculable, of the merely existential. And therefore, here the turning point came: the opposition against Hegel was the point out of which present day existentialism has arisen. And this leads me to the other line of thought which also starts with Augustine, and which is in conflict with the first line we have described. Augustine was a man of tremendous will. And for him will was the most essential character of reality. Everything lives in every moment by the divine will which for Augustine is the will of love. Here and now, with everything, in every

54

The Philosophical Background of My Theology

moment. In the Franciscan School of the Medieval philosophy, this will becomes more and more irrational; it becomes incalculable; it is the will of God nobody knows; and He could change it in every moment. The greatest of the thinkers of the Middle Ages, Duns Scotus, made especially this point. And in the German philosopher and shoe-maker, Jacob Boehme, we have the whole development of this idea. In the depths of the divine, there is both a divine and a demonic; there is something irrational which nobody can understand. And philosophers like Schelling, who was especially my philosophical teacher by his books – he died more than a hundred years ago – but he was the real beginner, even for Kierkegaard, of modern existentialism. And this demonic element in this line of thought came to full development in Nietzsche who is every influential for the existentialist philosophers of today, like the French Sartre and the German Heidegger. May I add only one remark: that I believe that this demonic element of which I am speaking is very much represented in demonic figures of Eastern religions, especially in the Hindu religion, and in its divine figures; and there it appears more in symbolic term, but in Western philosophy it appears in conceptual ways. This principle of the divine-demonic in the ground of being was the preparation, or one preparation, for my understanding of modern existentialism. It is the doctrine of man’s predicament (and of the predicament of his world): that the situation of his world, is ambiguous, is both “good” and “bad”, is mixed; and that in every life process, we find both elements and that we never can say that something is unquestionably “good” and unquestionably “bad”. But everywhere in every life process these two elements are present. And I feel that the existentialist development has applied this in literature, philosophy and art, to the whole human situation. I felt out two men about whom you certainly have asked yourself, “Why I don’t mention them more strongly and more in the beginning?” one is Aristotle and the other is Immanuel Kant. Now the reason for this is that I consider them as those two who give to all of us, in the Western world at least, the philosophical tools, namely the categorical structure of thought. Without them, every philosophical system becomes vague and undisciplined. And from both of them, I have received the philosophical discipline, and from each of them one fundamental philosophical insight: from Aristotle, for my theological thinking, the distinction between the two main ways of being, namely, potential being and actual being. And this permeates all my thinking. Potential being is the power of being which has not used its power but which might use it in every moment. It is not non-being; it is more than non-being. And actual being is what appears in time and space, and the other categories. And this leads immediately to Kant. Besides the epistemological elements in Kant, the relationship of subject and

The Theological Use of this Material

55

object which I have already discussed in connection with Stoicism, there’s one thing which I took from Kant, namely, his understanding that the human mind is limited to the categories of time and space, of causality and substance, of quantity and quality, and cannot go beyond these boundary lines in its own power. And this is, so to speak, a critical warning which came again and again from Kant against any philosophical arrogance, which tries to break through these boundary lines and limitations of all finitude. And this is perhaps another thing which has contributed to my understanding of existentialism. There are two lines of thought that I have tried to draw in this historical survey since Augustine, namely, one line which I will now call the essentialist line, and the other which will call the existentialist line. The one giving us the essences of being in empirical experience, and intuition; and the other which point to our human situation with its finitude, its foolishness, its ambiguities. My theology is an attempt to unite these two lines. Sometimes I have been called an “existentialist philosopher”, or better, an “existentialist theologian”. But there is no such a thing; because existentialism raises the problems of human existence; and theology, in the name of the religious symbols it interprets, tries to give answers, it uses the whole essentialist development in philosophy; and only the unity of these two can be of service to theology. If we stick to the one or the other exclusively, we never can have an understanding of the symbols of our religion.

The Theological Use of this Material Now I come to my second main part, namely, to show you how some of this philosophical material has been applied to the interpretation of Christian symbols. The means has been used for the building of my theological systematic thinking. I can give you only a few of these points; but I hope I will show that in these few cases, the philosophical concepts are absolutely necessary and never can be missed. Now when you asked the question – this is my first point – “Is there God?” then you have the whole philosophical history behind you which tried to understand what this little word in English is, or what being means. Because when you ask “Is there God?” – and every child asks this, because it is still unspoiled by mental or physical bias. If we becomes children again in this respect and ask the serious questions of our life, then the first question is “Is there God?” – and every child asks this, because it is still unspoiled by mental or physical bias. If we become children again in this respect and ask the serious questions of our life, then the first question is “Is there God?” – and every child asks this,

56

The Philosophical Background of My Theology

because it is still unspoiled by mental or physical bias. If we become children again in this respect and ask the serious questions of our life, then the first question is “Is there God?” Then, of course, the philosophical problem is, what do you mean with the world is? This demands a full philosophical analysis; this demands a knowledge of the history of philosophy and it demands profound thinking, about being and non-being.” No theologian can escape this necessity. One cannot answer that “Go d is a being.” If one did so, then something would be beyond God, being-itself, the power of being which made God into a being; that is impossible; that contradicts the unconditional character of the divine, it contradicts the divine holiness. And, therefore, we need in theology a doctrine of being, which always includes a doctrine of non-being. And I have not found any anti-philosophical theologian who did not hiddenly make statement about what it means that God is, who did not under cover answer philosophically the question of being and non-being, the ultimate question “Why is there something, why is there not nothing?” “What does it mean that there is something?” I want to refer here to the analogy to Eastern thinking – I just heard again of the article by Prof. Takeuchi who speak about absolute non-being and defines it as something which is beyond being and non-being. However we formulate the formula I would not formulate it this way; I stand more on the side of being. And Mr. Takeuchi says the whole Western world does so. But in any case, it is a problem which is common to the East and West; no theologian can escape it. Let me give you another point: one speaks of “the living God”. What does this word mean? It does mean that God is not a dead identity; but He has in Himself a manifoldness, or more exactly, when we apply a full philosophy of life as I found it in the philosophers mentioned, Boehme and Schelling and Nietzsche and Heidegger and others, there we have a philosophy of life which shows that all life has to go beyond itself and wants to return to itself. Where life cases to have the drive to go beyond itself, beyond a given situation, for instance, a given cultural tradition or a given psychological status in which we are, wherever this is the case, death replaces life. But, on the other hand, when life goes beyond itself, it wants to remain what it is, it doesn’t want to lose itself; it wants to return, and if it cannot return to itself, then death replaces life. So life always moves between these two poles of being stifled in one situation – unable to go beyond itself – and going so far away from itself that it cannot ˙ return to itself. And all life processes have this character . . .This is the human side. Now I want to apply this universal philosophy of life to the idea of the living God. God cannot, also, be understood as dead identity or as going ahead without returning to Himself. And this is the basis for the fact that in so many great religions trinitarian thinking has taken place. I think of Indian as well as of

The Theological Use of this Material

57

Christianity and of other religions, especially in the period in which Christianity came into the ancient world. The problem of the trinity is not a problem of numbers; some foolish people have made out of this a number riddle: one is three and three is one; this is foolishness. But trinity, be it in India or be it in Christianity, is first of all an expression of our experience of God as living, as overcoming our suffering, in fulfilling his creation. In all this the Divine goes beyond itself. But it doesn’t go beyond itself and lose itself; it comes back to itself. In eternity, it remained God. Now this is the meaning of the living God; and for this the symbols of trinitarian thought are a powerful expression, and should not be understood in absurd and foolish ways. Once upon a time, there were ways in which the divine mystery disclosed itself. And then, these symbols became themselves a holy mystery which nobody can touch – which is put on the alter and adored, and which has no revealing function any more. This is a bad state of things that has to be overcome. And now let me show how I apply the two main lines of thought which I called “essentialism” and “existentialism” to the doctrine of man. Because the doctrine of man is always the center in every theological thought. When we ask the question, “what is man?” we never can give one answer only. We always must give two, or more exactly, three answers. Man is first what he is created essentially, with his essential goodness. This idea, as Plato called it, this essence as I like to call it, is that which makes man in all his greatness and his uniqueness. When I had to develop this, I need a whole semester of lectures. But I will sum up what the result of this would be. Man should be defined as “finite freedom”. We do mean the rational freedom of the will; but freedom means the ability to have language, and to have language to have universals, and to have universals, (to have) concepts, to be able to control nature, to recognize it and to control it. All this is implied in what I call “freedom”; and of course, there is also implied, the possibility to break what modern psychology calls “conditions reflex”. Man is not a conditioned reflex, but only acts in the totality of his centered-being; and he reacts in terms of not reaching immediately; but in terms of stopping and thinking; deliberating, and then coming to decision. Now this is the one side of man. And this freedom of his centered reaction, which only man has in the full sense of the word, is what makes his man. But all this, of course, is in the limits of him finitude. Now you have the definition of the essential side of human beings. And now the other side: man’s existential predicament. There is the beautiful word “predicament” in English, which means a negative situation, the situation which Pascal has called the “misery of him who is great”. And this existential situation is what existentialist thinking describes. When I have to speak about the fall which is, of course, a myth, and not concept, then I prefer to

58

The Philosophical Background of My Theology

speak conceptually of the transition from essence to existence which, of course, never is set in some time in the past, but which happens in every new-born human being here and now, in all of us here and now, and this is what the fall means. We are estranged, as I like to call it, with the existentialist philosophers, from our true being. This can be described in many ways, and let me say when you want to know what existentialism is, not to restrict yourselves to the socalled existentialist philosophers, like Kierkegaard, Heidegger, Sartre, Marcel and others. But read the literature, the novels, the plays; book at the modern art in the galleries, where you can get hold of it, or the books about it; and see how here in all these documents the human situation is described as the situation of brokenness, of being broken in one’s essential goodness; of being estranged from what one essentially is and, therefore from what one ought to be. I cannot go into this, but perhaps more than from anything else, you can learn from these nobels, these paintings, these poems. Then also go to the philosopher; but they should be the last. And now, the third definition of man, the only really concrete one; the first is abstract, man’s essential being – we never can find it, it only shines through; then, man’s existential estrangement, we live in it, but it’s not alone; nobody could live alone in estrangement. There is a third one – life with its ambiguities; that’s our real being. There both elements are mixed within each other. And there is the power of which religion speaks, the power of healing. The word “healing” underlies the word “salvation”. Salvation is in its very nature healing. In revealing the split between our essential being and our existential estrangement, our return to our essential being under the conditions of existence. And this power of healing is for Christian thinking embodied in the Christ. It is embodied in such a way that one should not consider Him as a new law, as another man who has given laws which nobody can fulfill, but as the power of healing in history which is there always, in all religions, in all cultures, but which, as the Christians believe, is found in Him an expression which is more healing and which is the creation for the other expression. It doesn’t deny the other expressions; but it adds one criterion, namely, the concept of agape – of love which is the self – surrendering participation of the divine in the human. I cannot go into this more fully, but I only want to add one word: that this has great significance. This New Being, this concept of a being beyond essence and existence, a healing being, has great consequence for the understanding of history. It introduces concept which as I feel is strange to most of the religions, namely the concept of that which is new in history, not above history but that which is in history, the creation of the new-here and now; and this is one of the elements which I especially learned from the second line of thought coming from

General Remarks

59

Augustine, namely, that in the historical development, the new, the unexpected is actualized. There are moments – called by myself by the Greek word Kairos – the right moments: there are many similar words in India language – which gives a possibility of something really new in history now and in the future. Now this positive valuation of history seems to me to be connected with the valuation of the new being as a philosophical category which, of course, has no content if it were not filled with the experience of the agape, of the love, as it has appeared in the Christ.

General Remarks Now let me conclude with some general remarks, after I have finished now my second part. All philosophers are dependent on a hidden or open religious self understanding (selfinterpretation); whether they call it religious or not doesn’t matter. But every human being has something which he takes absolutely seriously; and that’s my definition of religion; it is a stage of being ultimately concerned. And we can find, if we look and see into the depth, and also into the style of thought of the philosopher, what the ultimate concern is behind his philosophy. And now vice versa, there is no theology, from the oldest days of the church which has not continuously used concepts which are objects of philosophical thought, as nature, or man, or history, or time, or space or cause, or substance, or world, or spirit or body, or whatever it may be. (No philosopher can escape,) no theologian can escape these concepts. Hiddenly, he is a philosopher and also a very bad one, because he never has had the power to criticize his use of these concepts in terms of a strict philosophical discipline. My second concluding remark is, if there is philosophy used in theology, this does not mean that theology is dependent on any special philosophical system. As Christian art, for instance, is not dependent of special artistic style. We are neither dependent on Plato as the Greek Orthodox Church usually is, nor on Aristotle as the Roman Church is, nor on Kant as many Protestants are. And we are not dependent on Hegel, nor on my friend and teacher Schelling, or on Hume as the English tradition often is, nor on Heidegger in terms of modern existentialism. All these people saw something and gave what they saw to the theologians, as they gave it to all other vocations, (to the legal vocations, to the artists, to the politicians, to everybody.) The theologian takes it and points with its help to the massage; but he uses the concepts given to him to point beyond these concepts. Now my last words: none of these philosophical concepts and analyses are necessary for the immediate devotional life. (There are very pious people who never would understand or use these concepts.) But the concepts are needed in

60

The Philosophical Background of My Theology

the moment in which the religious symbols become matters of interpretation and objects of criticism; and that means they are needed, in the moment in which the theological thought starts. And thinking about everything we encounter, questioning it, is one of the human potentialities that makes man. And this potentiality should not and never can be, in the long run, suppressed by authority, even the authority of churches or of the holy writings. Man must think, and if he has started to think, he must think radically, that is, he must go to the roots.

The Basic Ideas of Religious Socialism In order to Introduce my subject matter to you, I want to describe the historical and, at the same time, personal situation in which this movement which we call “Religious Socialism” was started. It was a situation of Germany after the first world war. The empire had broken down. The formerly suppressed social democratic movement had come to power, and this movement was the first problem I myself, and my friends who belonged to the same group, had to deal with when we came out of the war. This movement, called social democratic, was a democratically moderated Marxism, with a strong belief that history, without any question, would go in the right direction, and would, with a kind of unavoidable necessity, lead into the ideal of the socialist thinkers and prophets, namely, the classless society. The social democrats of this time called this kind of consideration “a scientific” socialism. And this word, “scientific” socialism, gave them the inner justification to behave like a scientist to nature, namely to watch and to wait, because the automatic process of history would lead anyhow to the desired end. That actually meant that there was very little of a revolutionary impulse in this party and this movement. From the point of view which was called, at that time, ideological, meaning philosophical foundations and the religious implications, this movement had replaced God by the necessary movement of history. The confidence was not in something ultimate or divine, but it was in the necessary of historical happenings, and the great symbol of all Christianity, especially the Christianity, as it is now existing in America, generally in Protestantism, the symbol of the kingdom of God was replaced by the symbol of classless society, which however they did not take as a symbol, because they believed that it would come one day very soon in time and space, here and now. There was, in this movement, no vertical line, as I like to use a metaphor, no line upward to something ultimate, to something trans-temporal. The only line was horizontal, the line ahead, and the hope was to go ahead, or to wait since history itself will go ahead, up to its fulfillment in the classless society. Now this was the one reality we found, when we returned out of the first world war in Germany. Then the other part, the German Churches of the Protestant majority, which, at that time, was two-thirds of all Germany. The type of this Protestantism was the Lutheran type, and this Lutheran type had very special characteristics in its relation to social problems. Its attitude to social and political problems was shaped by two factors, the one, the German history, the lack, even in the 19th century, of a really revolutionary bourgeoisie, as England and France and the United States knew them. There was, instead of that, a bourgeoisie which tried to adapt itself to the remnants of the old feudal system, a feudal system which

62

The Basic Ideas of Religious Socialism

was especially strong in Eastern Germany, where I was born and grew up, and where I still lived fully as a child in this time of feudalism, as it was hundreds of years old on German soil. Now such an attitude, made the desire for a radical change, very difficult if not impossible. But there was a second factor in the Lutheran theology itself, namely, what one could call the Lutheran pessimism, the negative valuation of human nature and of world history. Luther himself again and again expressed his disgust with history, expressed his despair that anything could be fulfilled in history, and was longing for the “good last day”, the day in which history comes to an end. It is obvious that no revolutionary transformation of reality could be even imagined by somebody who grew up under these sociological conditions and with this Lutheran kind of theology. The only attitude possible was patient submission to the God given authority. Paul’s famous word about the submission to the given authorities was used and abused at that time as it is even today, as some of you perhaps know, on Lutheran soil even by the highest bishop of the present day German Church. Now in this situation we found, there was one reconciling element in Lutheranism, as I believe, there is in large feudal systems, or paternalistic systems, namely, the obligation of those who are on top for those who are under them and something of this always existed on Lutheran soil. I remember how my father who was a kind of bishop in the Lutheran Church – this word did not exist at that time, he was called superintendent – but he told me once, I take care of this poor old woman, she is in our house everyday, but I am absolutely against the socialist movement because this movement puts something, some law, something objective between me and her, and I do not want that personal relationship are spoiled by legal structures. This, of course, I later on recognized, was a pure romantic longing for the past, because, at the same time, there were millions and millions of workers in the suburbs of Berlin, with whom nobody could have such personal relations, and he would not have been able to get anywhere without the political organization into which they went. But this was genuine and well meant, although mistaken, Lutheran ideology. There was no horizontal line and perhaps I may be justified in comparing this with the lack of a horizontal line in traditional Buddhism here and in all the Buddhist countries. There is compassion but there is no transformation of reality, and the understanding of the situation here is perhaps a little bit easier for me for this very reason, that I have this experience in the German Lutheran Churches. This was the situation; on the one side, in the workers, in the labor movement, only the horizontal line, the kingdom of God coming after tomorrow, and the name is classless society, and on the other side, only a vertical line, the salvation of the individual out of the a world of sin and turmoil. And in this

The Basic Ideas of Religious Socialism

63

situation, we, a group of people, Christians, Jews, humanists, felt that this is a world-historical occasion, and the world-occasion called us to unite, in some way, the horizontal and the vertical in this situation. We called our movement socialism, and not as a similar movement of R. Niebuhr was called later in the United States, Christian socialism. The situation in Europe was so that this would not have been meaningful because our Jewish friends, our humanist friends, are of equal importance, and have the same feeling of the situation as the Christian members had. It also did not mean that we now called socialism religion, a slogan which we sometimes found on the walls of the cities written by socialists. No, socialism not religion but what is needed by the socialist movement is a vertical, or religious dimension. Or more exactly, making it obvious that, even in the secular language and actions of this movement, something was hidden, a religious concern, a concern about the meaning of life, the meaning of life not only for selected individuals, but for the masses of the people, and to bring this out was the first task we had. We wanted to give, to the socialist movement, a vertical dimension, or more exactly, make conscious its hidden vertical dimension, and bring it out, in a better way than they could do it in their secular language. On the other hand, we wanted to show the Lutheran type of Christianity that grace is not a matter of individual salvation, or the salvation of individual salvation of individual souls, but the grace, without the prophetic message of justice, is individualistic, and is a kind of transcendent selfishness, a kind of selfishness with respect to the ultimate, using the divine for one’s own salvation, and leaving the world in its self-destructive state. We tried to show them that this is not the meaning of the Christian message, but that, without responsibility for this situation, individual salvation is in contradiction to the Christian message. There were our tasks and of course such takes are not the foundation for a political party. The religious socialist movement never was a political party, but it was a movement in many parties, in many groups. Now let me give you three characteristic contrasts in which we tried to formulate our intention. The reunion of the vertical and the horizontal, of the ultimate and the temporal, of the transformation of reality and the transcending of reality. I said already that we had the feeling, here is a providential occasion, and, for this providential occasion we used a New Testament word, the word KAIROS, a word of course which is older than the New Testament, which comes from classical Greek, and which means the right time to do something, the right time here and now. It does not mean CHRONOS, the other Greek word for time, which is the watch time, but KAIROS means now is a moment at hard, in which we can do something which we otherwise would not be able to do at all. In the

64

The Basic Ideas of Religious Socialism

New Testament, this Greek word was used for the coming of the Christ. This also was a matter of KAIROS, of the right time. He could not have come out any time, he had to come in the right time when the time was prepared, when the longing of the nations of the medieval culture was striving towards something new, and only after this preparation, in the Old Testament religion and in the religions of the surrounding nations, and in the philosophical religion of the Greeks and in the mystical religion which came from the Orient, only in this situation, the right time was given in which this event which was called “the coming of the Christ” which means the bringer of the new reality was expected. We can say KAIROS in this sense means the moment in which something vertical, something from the eternal breaks into the horizontal, into the temporal and when the eternal breaks into the temporal, be it an individual line, for individual person, be it in a social situation and in a horizontal moment, then something happens. Then the foundations are shaken, then something is in the process of being transformed. Of course this idea is derived from prophetic thought. This is the meaning of prophetism, not to say something which might come or might not come, but prophetism is to understand that in a special moment, in a special way, the eternal makes itself manifest in the temporal. And now we used this New Testament word and applied it to other moments in which history received, special way, influences, breaking in from the eternal, and it was our very bold belief that the end of the first world war, and especially the defeat of Germany, was a breaking in of this kind, of the eternal into the temporal, that it was a particular KAIROS, a particular moment, a particular right time. But such a moment always has two sides, the one side is it gives and the other side it demands. Something was given to us, the incomparable occasion, but, by this very fact, we were put in a position of overwhelming responsibility. The question whether we were right or wrong cannot be answered in a direct way. One can say we were wrong because we misjudged the time, as, by the way, even the great prophets have done, even Jesus has done. But on the other hand we were right when we felt that this was a moment of a special quality, a moment in which something eternal has itself shown to us, and nobody can ever take this experience away from us. Although externally, under Hitler, the religious movement was completely destroyed, and the people pushed into the underground or exiled, today the traces of it are very manifest everywhere. In this present day German socialist party, for instance, many people who at that time were young men nourished by religious socialist ideas, are now in leading positions. And on the other hand, the Lutheran Churches in Germany have learned to take upon themselves social responsibility, not only in the sense of helping people who are in need, but also transforming a reality which produces

The Basic Ideas of Religious Socialism

65

these needs and this is a tremendous change. So even externally our experience was not fruitless. Now I come to my second concept. You asked me what happens in such a KAIROS. My answer was, a special demonic structure is recognized and attacked. Here we rediscover, I think we did, the meaning of the word demon, domestic, or demoniac, a concept which prevails in the whole history of religion as the highest gods are distinguished from the dispossessed lower gods, or evil spirits are presupposed to have the power of destruction. This concept plays a tremendous role in Biblical statements; in Paul, in the Gospel, we everywhere hear about demonic powers who ruled the world and who take hold of individual human beings and possess them and drive them to insanity. Now this we took as a symbolic word, of course not in any sense literally, the sense of actual beings called evil spirits, but in the sense, if I want to express it philosophically, structures of destruction. I tell you which were the most important sources of our experience of these structures. We learned it first of all from psychotheraphy. We learned that in neurosis and especially in psychosis, in the phenomenon which is called schizophrenia, split-consciousness, there is such a structure of destruction, where no good-will, no endeavor can heal; the word being “possessed” as it has been used always in history is just the right symbol. Only healing powers greater than the individual can help him. And the second realm from which we learned it was the social realm, and here especially the Marxian analysis of our western society was a very similar insight, namely, in social structures in which good-will has a consequence of strengthening the split, it was of course a split of classes in the 19th century industrial society. Now out of these, the idea of the demonic arose, and we gladly used this old mythological symbol in order to express the most modern insight of that psychology and that sociology. One of the greatest examples then occurred, Hitler, and proved to be stronger than we were, namely the demonic elevation of a god which is called nation, and has some under-gods, and which has all these characteristics of splitting the world because if one nation arises over the other, in splits the human community and produces a reaction of the other, and out of this demonic structure we could then learn that our term the demonic was a most adequate description of the situation. From the moment in which the Nazis not only came to power but even before that, they behaved in the way the first Gospel describes Satan, he is a liar and murderer from the beginning; that they were from the beginning, they lied and conquered Germany by lies, and where lies were not sufficient they murdered. Now this is consequence of the demonic split. If I express it now in a strictly religious terminology then I would say it is the elevation of something preliminary to ultimacy, it is idolatry, it is the elevation of something which is

66

The Basic Ideas of Religious Socialism

good if it remains finite, to infinite claim, when it becomes bad, it becomes an idol and a demon. And now against this structure of destruction, we believe only structures of creation and Grace can help. No good-will as such can help, and all the good-will of all of us, and of many Germans and many Japanese, could not help to prevent this final schizophrenia of the second world war. Often the demonic likes to go into places where the secular has conquered the religious, and this is understandable because mere secularism becomes, after a short time, empty. Without an ultimate concern, without an ultimate meaning of life, it cannot stand up, and into this emptiness of which we had so much in pre-Hitler Germany, the demonic power entered, and the observation of the younger generation when they rushed to Nazism, was they had nothing else, they were empty. And therefore when something came which seemed to give them a meaning of life, they rushed into it, but this something was a demon, and this is a very great seriousness for every secular culture, or for every culture in the process of being secularized, that you cannot keep the secular alive because it becomes empty and then, not the divine but the demonic enters it, if there are no forces of handing and of Grace against it. This was the second concept. The concept of the demonic conquest in KAIROS is always fragmentary. We did not conquer it but somehow it was conquered by the self-destruction of the second world war. But even now it is conquered only fragmentarily and therefore one important thing must be taken from these experiences. We cannot accept any Utopia. Whatever replaces a demonic structure is itself the soil for the rise of new demonic forms. It is necessary to destroy every demonic power we see, but we shall not believe that then everything is all right. As I remember, people said if only Hitler is removed then the world is saved for everything good. And today one says, if only the communists were removed, then the world will be all right. This is certainly not the case. Life in all its forms is ambiguous. And so then you ask me for my third concept and this concept is a word which is based on two terms of Immanuel Kant, the great German philosopher. The one work of his is Autonomy, man having within himself the law of reason. Without any interference, be it from his desires or fears, be it from authority. Autonomy and enlightenment are the terms which cannot identify. On the other hand, the opposite of it, subjection to authority is Heteronomy, from the Greek word HETEROS, else, and NOMOS, law. While autonomy comes from AUTO, self-law, heteronomy, comes from else-law or strange law. There is something which is neither self-law only, nor strange law, but which is theonomy which is divine law. But if it is divine law, it is not law at all, because God is present, he is not a strange law-giver. It is a state of mind and reality in which the divine is manifested, and so we spoke that the idea of all human striving, is a state of theonomy, a state in which all the cultural forms and their autonomous

The Basic Ideas of Religious Socialism

67

creation, in art, in music, in sciences, in politics, in morals, in social relations, everywhere, all these forms have one point which has the line of the vertical. Some ultimate meaning is expressed in them and that sometimes has happened in history, in the forms of the daily life of all the cultural production, something ultimate, an answer to the question of every human being, hidden or open: what is the meaning of my life? This answer was expressed in a “a great symbol”. Now such a theonomy is not a Utopia. It has existed in history, it came again and again, it may come again and that is what we hope. Of course we are all dependent on great tradition, but this great tradition should not make us heteronomous. We all are dependent on the modern autonomy of scientific research, but this should not make us autonomous in the sense of a life without ultimate meaning. Out of this situation, religious socialism demanded and hoped for a state of society in which all he forms of life, all, I have to include also economic law, world conditions, everything, are not only good in themselves, the perfection a good artist wants to do, but also point to an answer the question of the meaning of life. This was what the labor movement, what the millions of workers first of all were missing. It includes the question of social justice, but it was the emptiness of their existence in these terrible suburbs built in the end of the 19th century, without any remaining symbols of their agrarian past, without any meaning of life except their daily going to work and then going to some cheap diversion. Now this was the situation, and therefore we said all the other demands are included, but the final demand is that there will be again the vertical line experience. And now I come to my last consideration after these three concepts, namely, what have they to say to us in our present situation in east and west. Have they any meaning for the present situation? Do they help to illuminate the relation between religion and the social movement? We start again with KAIROS, the right time. There is always a right time for a right step in the right direction. This cannot be doubted. One cannot wait for a great KAIROS and remain inactive, for there are long stretches in history without a great KAIROS, and I remember my experience after the second world war both in America and shortly later in Europe. There was a feeling of the lack of any KAIROS, it was a feeling that, if the eternal has hidden itself in a cloud, then there is no God which speaks to us, and such stretches of history are frequent, but nevertheless one never knows, it can happen. It might be that the experience of this country for instance after the second world war was and is similar to that of Germany after the first world war. Those only who are grasped by such an experience of the breaking in of the eternal can answer this question. Nobody can answer it from outside. Only when the prophetic mind arises amongst you, can one speak responsibility about the KAIROS. And I believe that this is not impossible.

68

The Basic Ideas of Religious Socialism

Then the other concept, the demonic. The demonic is also always present in history and is a refutation of every Utopian self-deception whether it is secular, progressivistic as we had it in the 19th and early 20th century, or Christian, here especially one group, namely, the Calvinistic and sectarian type of Christianity as it is predominant in the United States. There is not much temptation to except a Utopian fulfillment of history, in the Asiatic religion or in the Catholic and Lutheran types of Christianity, but the powerful type which characterizes American Protestantism has it. The recognition of the demonic is always the first step in its conquest. The demonic as the old mythologies know likes to hide, and to find out about it is the first step to deprive it of its power. What are demonic phenomena here and today in our moment of history? The characteristic of the demonic is the split as we have experienced it in individuals and in nations and between nations. I would say the most universal expression of the demonic today is a split between the control of nature by man, and the hate of man to fall under the control of the product of his control. He produces and then falls under the power of what he has produced, the whole system of industrial existence. It has liberated him, it has given him control over nature and now it puts him into a servitude in which he loses more and more his being, his person. This form of dehumanization was what we fought against in other symbols in early religious socialism. We must continue this fight now on a much larger basis. The second demonic symbol of our time is a split between east and west. There are two ideologies with absolute claim, which necessarily threaten to destroy each other at every moment. It is not so that one is divine, namely we, and the other demonic, namely the other, but it is so that the split is the demonic structure, the impossibility of overcoming this split. And the third has elements of both, and here I dare to say something about the situation here, namely the conflict between past and present in the Japanese mind. It also has been called a schizophrenia, and it is schizophrenia, namely split mind in all these cases. And this is always the expression of the demonic. You can find it in the struggle of a nation, sometimes in the relation of man to nature, and what we can do and what would be a continuation of the work of early religious socialism is a description of these demonic structures in their real depth, below the daily slogans which go on especially in the national conflict, revealing the riddle of this human situation, denouncing the demonic structures of destruction and keeping one’s sense open for a new theonomy which may come in any moment. And this leads me to ask once more about theonomy. In America the question has been asked in connection with the so-called resurgence of religion in the last 10 years. We do not know if it is only through ecclesiastical reaction, or through emotional exciting which then goes away shortly, or whether it is an indication for more. I believed it is an indication for more, for the longing of

The Basic Ideas of Religious Socialism

69

a new theonomy, but that is all I can say. And here in this country it seems to me that, in spite of the great old traditional and the Christian Churches and the other religions, there is ultimately an indifference to the religious question. The theonomous aim is strongly felt by many of those whom I have met in this short time and books I have read, but of course this is the question and what I can do in this moment is only tto close with this question.

Religion and Culture The subject “Religion and Culture” is a subject which includes an infinite amount of problems and an infinite material on the basis of which one could answer these problems. Both terms “religion” as well as “culture” cover an almost unlimited amount of human experiences and human activities, and when these experiences and activities are combined or contrasted with each other, then new problems arise. I want to give you first some examples chosen form a large number of human activities in which out of an original unity of religion and culture conflicts have developed, often so deadly conflicts that countries have been devastated by them, that religious have been suppressed or expelled, that whole cultures have been destroyed by the conflicts between religion and culture. But even if the religion or religion and culture had not such world historical impact, it always had a profound significance, creative as well as destructive, for the personal life of many people and, I may add, especially in the academic world. A conflict between scientific honesty and inherited religious faith can disrupt the personal center of an individual as it can destroy the educational system of a nation, and it has produced martyrs in many cases. A conflict between a person’s bondage to social traditions and his new religious experience can disrupt his family ties, his friendships, his communal life, and produce for him estrangement from everyone and utter loneliness, a conflict between stateprotected religions, and dissenting religious groups can lead to bloody civil wars, and the claim of the state to control a church or of a church to control a state can lead to hundreds of years of permanent struggles for power as, for instance, in the European Middle Ages. Even in the realm of the arts, religion can do both – inspire highest artistic activity and crippling restrictions to a define style as in the neo-Gothic church buildings in the late hundred years in Europe and America, which I hope will be spared this country. Perhaps most disrupting, although not intended, is the contrast between the technical control of reality, metaphorically speaking, the horizontal line of human action and the religious way of transcending the finite toward the ultimate, the vertical line of human receiving. These conflicts, these events of past and present in groups and individual persons make the problem “religion and culture” not an inescapable one here in this country as every-where the world. Now let us ask, what do we mean with the word “culture”? We must look beyond culture in order to understand culture. We must look at life universally. Life in all its dimensions creates itself by growth and propagation. Life is self-

72

Religion and Culture

productive. You can see this in living organisms, like plants and animals and man, but it is also true in the world of atoms and crystals and other conditions in social groups. Everywhere life goes beyond itself to something which is new. It produces, but not something strange. It produces again life. Within this process of self-creation of life, culture has its place. From this universal law of the universe, we must understand culture. Culture is the self-production of life in the dimension of spirit, and spirit is something we know only in man. No other being amongst those we know has that character which we call “spirit”, the unity of power and meaning, and in this dimension man produces himself. He also does so by growth and propagation as animals and plants, but his real humanity appears in his cultural production, be it in language, the sciences, the arts, be it in technical control of reality or in personal development, or in social and political construction. Whether man receives or whether he shapes the given reality, these are the two main sides of our culture, in each cultural act, life produces itself through man, I said also life creates himself, and I will use that word now but I use it with hesitation because creation is an originality religious word. Nevertheless by analogy we can use it also for man and then we can say man creates meaning through language He creates truth through science. He creates expression through the arts, and he creates means for ends through technique. He creates fulfilled humanity, mature humanity, through education, and he creates justice through the law in the state. In order to understand how religion can interfere destructively with cultural creativity, we must first consider the character of cultural production. It combines three elements – the subject matter, the form, and the meaning or substance. Take a painting. As a subject matter, the artist may have chosen a landscape. The form is given by his acquired ability for artistic production, and his spiritual meaning or substance is expressed in the style be it the special style of a period or of a particular school or of the individual artist or of a particular period in the development of the artist. I use the word “creativity”, and if you use that word we imply that culture must be free. Creativity means producing something new, and this presupposes the freedom to go beyond the given beyond that which exists and is old. If the freedom falls anew, is restricted, then the creativity is diminished. If the freedom falls anew, it is taken away completely. Creativity disappears and we have examples for this even in our period. This is so in all cultural activity. Therefore, science needs a freedom to choose its object, of following the rules of scientific research without looking right or left to churches or states and expressing the results of its research openly for criticism and discussion, and the arts needs a freedom to use any subject matter, the ugly and even the demonic,

Religion and Culture

73

as well as the beautiful and the divine. And they must be able to follow the laws of artistic creation without any interference and to express themselves and the spiritual substance which drives them in any style to which they are driven. And education must be free to use the methods which are most adequate to the nature of man, to the real nature and all its psychological and sociological implications and the ideal nature, humanity into which education is leading, and politics must try to give freedom to everybody in the determination of his social existence which is so important that it embraces all other freedoms, for the state can take them away and can protect them, and this is the ultimate meaning of the otherwise so misunderstand term “democracy”. Interference with the freedom of creativity in all these realms means restriction and possible destruction of freedom and of creativity and, therefore, of true humanity. Man cannot develop without creative freedom to true humanity and this is the man thing I want to say now about culture. Now let me come to the concept of religion. We spoke of life as creating itself, and we call the self-creation of life in man’s spirit “culture” But life not only creates itself. It also transcends itself. It drives toward the sublime, to higher and richer forms in rocks, flowers and animals and man, and finally it drives through man toward the ultimately sublime, and the ultimately sublime is what we call the “holy”, the “sacred”. Towards the sublime man’s spiritual life is directed. It strived above itself towards its fulfillment in ultimate reality, toward the eternal from which it comes and to which it wants to return. But life would not long for the eternal if the eternal were not manifest within life and, above all, within man’s spirit. There it is, driving man toward the question of a meaning of his life, an ultimate meaning, and this question is not like other questions. The finite is a preliminary concern. It is the ultimate concern which is present in every man. Religion is a state of being ultimately concerned about something ultimate, and I respect this sentence – Religion is a state of being ultimately concerned about something ultimate. We can also say that religion is a state of mind in which we take something unconditionally seriously. Whatever somebody considered as ultimately serious it becomes holy for him. He is grasped by it. He is moved by it. He strives toward it. He commits himself to it. He makes of it his god, whether he calls it god or not. And I never have found the human being to whom nothing is holy, who has nothing, how unearthly it maybe, what he does not take seriously without restriction. The concept of religion which I gave in the last section implies that irreligion is impossible. There are certainly innumerable people with a false god, but there is no man without a god, whatever he makes his god. This sounds very different

74

Religion and Culture

from the ordinary concept of religion in contrast to the larger concept of religion I have developed before. Religion is usually called a cultural activity with gods, temples, priests, monks, sacrifices, myths, doctrines, festivals, prayers, meditations, special organizations, like churches or sects. And one may ask: What has this reality which plays such a great role in the life of this nation, as many other nations, what has this reality of daily religion to do with the concept of religion as a state of being ultimately concerned? Let me give the answer. The answer is that whether the holy appears, and whenever the holy is expressed, ultimate seriousness is demanded. However destroted the concrete religions may be, originally they wanted to give an answer to the infinity important question of the meaning of our life. They wanted to elevate us to the sublime and the holy itself. They wanted to evaluate us to ultimate reality. Religion as a state of ultimate concern is first experienced within the concrete religions. It is expressed in the great symbols and doctrines, in their holy writings and the life of their saints. Living religion demands commitment to the ultimate with all one’s heart and with all one’s soul and with all one’s mind and this is what “ultimate concern” means. It is the functions of the living religions to remind us always of the one thing which is unconditionally serious – the meaning of our life. In meditation, prayer and community of love, ultimate concern is preserved and protected against profanization in the needs and concerns of daily life. This is the necessary function of religion in the narrower sense of the word. But there is another side to the concrete religions, the religions in the narrower sense of the word. We spoke already of the distortion. I would call it a demonic destruction and I call it demonic because religious often use the claim of the ultimate which they represent for their own glory, for their power, their symbols, their doctrines, their ethics, their politics, their artistic expressions. This destruction of religion has a consequence that religions try to suppress every cultural creativity which contradicts their teachings in politics and arts. In the name of the holy, they claim absolute truth and absolute justice and absolute power for themselves as particular religions. They are not satisfied with expressing the ultimate. They put themselves on the place of the ultimate itself. This is the sin of religion, its downfall in all history, and this is the cause of the destructive interference with culture. This is also the reason of the revolt against religion in all realms of our cultural life. It is the reason for the rise of a secular culture in the West and in the East. But religions which resist the creative freedom of culture, either by suppressing it or by withdrawing from the creative cultural process into a sacred corner of their own, lose their meaning and their impact on the living generations of every period, also of you. They live a living death.

Religion and Culture

75

Up to now we have given the basic concepts of culture and the religion which may help us to solve the problem “religion and culture” and we have pointed to their basic sources of their conflict, to the sin of religion. There is, however, also a sin of culture. It occurs, for instance, if a cultural function, science or politics or the arts, becomes a matter of ultimate concern and tries to subject the others as science has done for several centuries when it became the tyrant and used its method in a imperialistic way to approach all realms of life, or as politics have done in this century when they in a totalitarian way usually tried to subject all realms of life to one political ideology which they claimed to be the ultimate itself for human existence. And even the arts have tried to do it in the intellectual classes of the West and already also in some groups in this country, transforming ultimate concern into the expression of artistic creativity. This is the one way in which culture can become demonic and destructive. It also can happen if a special cultural idea claims to be ultimate, for instance, philosophical naturalism which justifies its power with science, although it is only another quasi-religious faith political fascism or political communism which also tried to base their ideologies on a scientific foundation, although it was not the scientific method which made them what they are, but a demonized religious faith. Then they become religions themselves, religions hiddenly quasi- religious, half-religious, whatever you want to call them, but with an ultimate claim as every religion has. They demand ultimate and total commitments, acceptance of their ideologies and subjections to their powers. Then they commit the demonic sin of religion and suppress everything which stands against them. This is the sin of culture which has become more powerful and has taken on more phases than the sins of religion in our period of history. This elevation of a cultural function or cultural idea to ultimate, to religious significance is possible because in every cultural creation there is besides subject matter and form a thought element to which I already have referred, the element of meaning of spiritual substance. Every painting, every scientific method, every political system expresses indirectly in its symbols and in its ways of life an ultimate concern which underlies it. Every cultural creation has a style and this means a particular expressive character and in this character something is indicated. I feel here compelled to compare this character with the infinitely expressive characters of Chinese and Japanese writing. They are a style and express by their style a relationship to life universally, a relationship in which expression, the artistic function, has a fundamental meaning. Every such style in all cultural creations indicates something. It indicates the ultimate concern a period, of a cultural group as a nation, of a tradition, of a school, of a personality, and if you are able to decipher

76

Religion and Culture

style, to find out what a style indicates, which ultimate concern is expressed in it, then you are able to understand how the creators of a culture understood themselves. May I add here again a word to those of you who study history and humanities. The facts are necessary. They are the presupposition. But in all what you learn about history of past cultures, you can discover a style and you can decipher this style, and when you do this then you look into the heart of these cultures. You understand what they wanted to express in all forms of their life and then those facts become living witnesses to human potentialities, and the study of history and humanities becomes a study of one’s self as a human being. However far these periods may be, you can see how these people answered the question of the meaning of their life. This element of meaning in spiritual substance in every culture expressed in its style is a presence of ultimate concern of religion in its large sense in this culture. This element gives every culture its depths, its sublime character and its greatness. If you now ask how this religious element in our cultural creativity makes itself noticed in them, then let me add a problem which is especially urgent in the context of an academic group, namely the problem of religion and science. I believe, and I indicated that already, that here the most concrete conflicts have arisen in our period of history and that especially in the leading intelligentsia in the West and now also largely in the East, and certainly in this country, the scientific ideal seems radically to contradict the religious ideal. To this I want to give, on the basis of what I have said, a very concrete answer, first an answer in which the difference, the divergence of both realms is indicated according to the concepts of religion and culture I have developed. Let me bring it down to one decisive problem, namely the problem of language. The language of religion and the language of sciences are two different languages. The language of science is taken from observation and conclusion within the finite world, within the finite relations of finite objects to each other. This language is best if it can be reduced to mathematical formulas, then it has complete preciseness and can be used for the building of the technical world in which we are living. It comes to the humanities. This method of mathematical inquiry is impossible. There another element comes in, namely the element of understanding, in science, in mathematical sciences, detachment is the most important part. In the humanities, in history, participation by understanding is most important. Of course, there are also detached analyses and researches to be made, but if you don’t understand it is meaningless. And now religious language. It is still something quite different. It is neither the language of science nor is it the language of humanities, not even of

Religion and Culture

77

poetry, but it is a language of symbol and myth, religious symbols, and religious myths are the language of religion, and this is so because religion lives in the dimensions of the ultimate, and the ultimate cannot be reached by anything preliminary in time and space and, therefore, religion has created another language for itself than the language of our daily life or the language of science or the language of humanities, even of the arts. It is the language of the religious symbol, using all the materials of the daily life but using these materials in such a way that the materials are transformed into something else. Their original meaning is not valid and, therefore, no conflicts between a religious symbol and a scientific statement ever can appear if this difference is understood. Only if sciences produces quasi-religious symbols, as I said before, or if religion interferes with scientific statements, including historical statements, then the conflicts are unavoidable and disrupt cultures and personalities. This is the situation and, therefore, it is so important not to understand religion as a cultural activity which claims things which it should not claim, which interferes with science, politics, etc., but to understand religion as speaking of something which transcends these realms, although out of this dimension of the ultimate then an abundance of visions for the finite world follow, but not in terms of interference but in terms of opening the eyes. The moment in which religion interferes, it becomes demonic. The moment in which it opens eyes, it is creative. And on the basis of this statement which adds something to what I said before in a very concrete realm, the realm of your studies here and now, it may be easier for you to understand the more abstract definitions of religion and culture I have given before. Now after having shown the example of the different languages that it is not necessary that there is any interference between religion and science, let me also show the other side, namely, the spiritual substance which is in every scientific world, which gives the life of the scientist and his ideas the style of which I spoke before. It is the passion for one element in that which concerns us ultimately, namely the element of truth, and this element is decisive ultimately for the meaning of science. If science has no other meaning than help to control reality in technical gadgets and instruments, then science becomes empty and loses more and more its character, but when I talked about these things with leading scientists in Cambridge, for instance, then the answer was: “This is not what we want. What we want is truth and what we see is ultimate reality as it expresses itself in every atom and in every movement of body and mind, and if we make our research into these things, then we discover in our way also ultimate reality, not interfering with religion which speaks in symbols but expressing the meaning of our work in terms of discovering ultimate reality in the forms of finite reality.”

78

Religion and Culture

When I had to talk with artists and read their self-interpretations, I think especially of painters, then I found the same attitude. They don’t want – many of them – only to paint for pleasure, but they all said they want to paint in order to express reality, the real reality, the ultimate reality. And this is what I meant with the spiritual substance of the sciences and the arts. This produces a style, but the way in which they experience ultimate reality or the meaning of their life produces then their styles of research, of conclusions, of artistic expression, of poetic and also of political expression. No culture, therefore, is without the religious dimension, the dimension of the ultimate, and its I wanted to show you in these two cultural activities. Now I come to my last words. There is no culture without the religious dimension, the dimension of ultimate concern, the dimension of the question of the meaning of our life, but it is quite possible – and this is a word of warning – that this dimension of the ultimate is covered add hidden to such a degree that it becomes almost invisible. We can repress it in ourselves although it is always there and tortures us if we press it. It can be repressed in a culture, although it is always there and shows itself in the disintegration of culture. This covering up or hiding of the dimension of the ultimate in culture we call the secularization, or if it becomes to an extreme, the profanization of a culture. In such a secularization or profanization the sublime loses its power. The profane triumphs. Culture becomes meaningless and empty. It is not the holy emptiness of mystical religions but it is the profane emptiness of a mechanized depersonalized and cynical culture. East as well as West are threatened by this situation. With the Westernization of this country, it is threatened with increasing secularization, with the loss of its old highly sublime culture and its religious substance. In face of this situation, the first task is not to bring people back into temples and churches, but the first task is to realize the situation, to understand what is going on, to raise as powerful as we are able, each of us is able, the ultimate question the question of the meaning of his life and of our life, to raise this question in all our cultural activities, whatever we study and whatever our vocation may be in future, and to raise it equally strongly, within the boundary lines of religion where it is equally needed as in culture. Then let me close with the statement that where the ultimate question is raised with ultimate seriousness, with unconditional passion, there the answer is near.

God as Reality and Symbol This is the last lecture I shall be giving after eight unforgettable weeks in Japan. If we had time, I should like to sum up all that I have said and even more what I have learned during these weeks in this country. But such time is not given us and so I must concentrate on some main characteristics of the philosophy of religion. Of course when you hear the word religion, you also think of the word “God” although not all religions use the word “God”. Therefore it seems adequate to sum up somehow a philosophy of religion by concentrating on this idea of God, which is both reality – the most real of all realities and in whatever we say about it – symbol. It is reality – the first and basic reality – the reality from which we derive the fact that there is something and not nothing, and above all that we are. And, therefore, the reality of which we speak; this is our ultimate concern. It is that which we should take with infinite seriousness because it answers the one question which is infinitely serious, namely the question as to for what I am here; where do I come from; where do I go to; and above all what is the meaning of my life. The human being who has never asked the question regarding the meaning of his or her life is not a fully developed human being. It is less than human to live without asking the question, “What is the meaning of this life which is given to me?” And now this is what religion means. Religion means ultimate concern about the ultimate, unconditional seriousness about that which is ultimately serious, infinitely serious, namely, the question of the meaning of my life. And, for this reason I say, however we answer this question, whenever we use the word “God” or any other word in which we find the ultimate meaning of our life, this is the most real thing amongst all realities. This is the really real. For only what is really real can present the answer to the question of our reality. The ultimate for which we ask when we ask the question about the meaning of our life is manifest to us in an experience which I believe every human being has, namely, the experience of the Holy. Something is holy to everybody. This doesn’t mean that you must evaluate the religious which you know and meet and encounter here and there. But it does mean that there is something in life for which you would give your life. And that means what you take with ultimate seriousness. When somebody has an experience because he is a questioning human being, he uses this greatest possibility of men to ask the ultimate question. Then he already is aware of what I call the Holy. The ultimate wherever it’s manifest to us is the Holy. Now, of course, many things can be called holy by human being and have been called so. There are the divine figures about which I will speak later on a little bit. But there are also some things for which we wouldn’t use the word “God”, when we

80

God as Reality and Symbol

hear about them. For instance, a nation may become the holiest of the holy for a human being, or nature or his success in life may become his ultimate concern. Or a beloved person a child, a husband, a wife or parents may become the ultimate concern. But in the moment in which something is your ultimate concern you make into your God. And that’s what God first of all means, the object, the content of your ultimate concern. So everything can because a god for somebody and even for people who never use the word “God”. Even religions which are afraid of the word “God” as Buddhism, or secular forms of life which are even more afraid, they have their hidden God. Or indifferent people of all times. I hear that not only in the United States but also in Japan a large group of young people are indifferent towards the question of the meaning of their life: however, they also have in some corner of their mind and their soul something which they regard as holy. Further I would say that even systems which are in their intention atheistic, as we say, have their God. In Nazism in Germany, I myself have experienced it. They had their God, the land and soil of Germany and their prophet, Hitler. And also in Communism. I met in the early period of fighting Communism, at the end of the 19th and at the beginning of the 20th century, people who sacrificed themselves for this idea. How right or wrong it may have been, it was their ultimate concern. So every body has his God. And the question of God can not be suppressed even if you avoid consistently the word “God”. I spoke about the fact that in everybody there is something which he takes with ultimate seriousness. Now we must ask: how can we express this ultimate which we take seriously? And there I answer: whenever something is made into God because it is taken with ultimate seriousness then it is expressed in symbols. We can not speak of our ultimate reality in any otherway than symbolically. Now what is a symbol? A symbol must be distinguished from a sign. Both symbol and sign point beyond themselves. The red-right sign at the street corner has nothing to do with red but it points to the stopping of the cars. It points beyond itself. It is a convenient way of pointing to something else. Symbols also point to something else. For instance, Buddha figures – in the temples here and all over the country – they point to the reality for which Buddha stands, Buddha spirit or ultimate reality. But the difference between the red-light at the street corner and the Buddha sculpture or in Christianity the Christ picture is that they are symbols, and not only signs. You cannot change them at will. They have appeared in history. They have impressive themselves through thousands of years on billions of people. They participate in the power of what they symbolize. In the Buddha statue you can feel the power of that to which the statue points and of what Buddha means. And in a Christ picture, you can see and feel, if it is a real picture, and not a poor attempt which hides the meaning more than opening it, which in the case in many Christian churches in America,

The Tention between the Concrete and the Absolute

81

and unfortunately even in this country of great artistic culture. But if it is a real picture, then it is a genuine symbol and points to what the word Christ means and the word Christ itself is a symbol and points to the new reality which has come into time and space. The same is true of the Buddha sculpture. The sculpture points to the Buddha spirit and the Buddha spirit points to the ultimate reality, to the one beyond subject and object. Now in this way you have symbols, which participate in the power of that to which they point. And that is meaning of symbols. Now I must tell you that in religion there is no other expression than symbolic expression. All religious expressions – the visual expressions in the temples and churches, the expressions in the holy books in words – have symbolic character. They point to something else. But at the same time, if they are genuine symbols they participate in the power of what they symbolize. They communicate to open minds that for which they stand. That is the greatness of symbols. I cannot imagine a poorer life than a life without symbols.

The Tention between the Concrete and the Absolute in the Development of the Idea of God The dynamic of religion has been derived from the tension between the ultimate and the concrete in the state of ultimate concern. We see the claim of something concrete to be ultimate. I shall now describe what this means for the development of the idea of God. One may start with the pre-mythological state which can be characterized as the experience of the holy without differentiation. The holy is not sharply separated from the profane, nor the ultimate from the concrete. This is the stage of belief in a spirit in everything, rocks and trees, animals and stars, tools and human bodies. One can also speak of a pan-sacra-mental world-view: the holy present is to be approached ritually in every outstanding piece of reality. No idea of God can appear in this stage, no concept of the holy, no idea of the divine, though neither of these elements was lacking. The differentiation appears in the stage in the stage of the great mythological divinities. The separation of the elements has occurred. The holy is concentrated in the divine figures who rule and through which section of being or acting are consecrated; the divine powers fight victoriously against demonic powers, – often formerly also divine figures; and the divine powers represent ultimate concern for the believers, transcending the finite categories. But this has not solved the tension. The gods are supposed to be ultimate, but they are also finite in their particular characters, male, female etc. They are holy but in relation to each other they act in a profane way. They remain idols in spite of their glory and in spite of the fact that they develop a monarchic monotheism.

82

God as Reality and Symbol

On the basis of polytheism and monarchic monotheism two type of radical monotheism develop: the mystical monotheism and the exclusive monotheism. The first transcends in experience all concrete objects. It lies above the world, but not outside the world; it is the carrying substance in and above everything. The other way is that of exclusive monotheism. It is created by the revelatory experience of the Jewish prophets and has achieved its world-wide influence through Islam and Christianity. The God of Israel, in all his concreteness, fights against all other gods and conquers them, because he is the God of justice. When the prophet Amos said this, an important event happened: the universal principle of justice triumphed over every absolute claim of a particular God. Only the bearer of universal justice can be the true God. In both the mystical and the prophetic ways of transcending polytheism the element of ultimacy was victorious; and it became more and more radical. The ultimacy of the ultimate in both forms of monotheism threatened to swallow the concrete completely. Then, however, the reaction of the religious consciousness began. On the basis of mystical monotheism it happened in the East that the ultimate became concrete in the Buddha-figure, and through it a host of limited gods reappeared in Mahayama; and could even mix with the Mana-type which underlies Shintoism. In the West Neoplatonism reestablished the world of Hellenistic gods within a pantheon below the ultimate but justified in the secondary role. This was a threat to the exclusive monotheism, on which Christianity is based; and Christianity conquered it. This was not regarded as a deadly threat to Buddhism; and Buddhism tolerated the reemergence of the polytheistic stage. In late Judaism and Christianity mediating beings appeared, representing the concrete element, partly still abstract as the Divine Glory or Wisdom which stands before God, or the Spirit or the Word; partly more concrete, as angels, demons, even Satan, or heavenly figures, later applied to Jesus as the heavenly “Son of Man”, or the “Man from Above”, or the Christ. At the same time Hellenistic religion produced the concrete mystery gods like Isis, Mithras etc. in whose struggle and death the believer participated; this symbolism was also applied to Jesus. In the Roman Church the saints and above all the Virgin Mary were added. Finally the whole problem converged in the trinitarian symbolism which is the most adequate solution of the tension between the concrete and the absolute. It is not restricted to Christianity; we have it even in Buddhism. It is not a matter of numbers, 2 or 3 or 4. But it is a way of solving the problem of the absolute and the concrete in man’s ultimate concern. The trinitarian symbolism should not be adored as a mystery, but should be understood as a way by which the religious consciousness solves the tension between the absolute and the concrete in the idea of God.

The Idea of God and Realized Problems

83

The Idea of God and Realized Problems The inner-religious development of the idea of God led to the point in which later on the theological analysis started. Some of the problems related to this idea will be discussed. The first one is the relation of the object of ultimate concern, the divine to the being. This is the question: what does the existence of God mean? Obviously it cannot mean that there are many things and amongst them one, called God. This contradicts our experience of the divinity of the divine. The divine being is something different from all beings, it is not a being, but the power of being in everything that is. The riddle of being is included in this “is” concerning God. If God were one being besides others he would be subject to the structure of being like everything else; and this “structure of being” would be the true ultimate. But the structure of being is not above God but an element in God. The misunderstanding arose as if being itself were everything which can be said about God. But it is the necessary basis for everything later. It is children’s question and that of all great philosophers. The next question is : what do we mean when we say that God is living and not a dead identity, or that there is life at all? The actuality of being is life. The threefold nature of all life-processes: selfidentity, self-alteration, and self-return. This universal process is rooted in the Ground of Being. The negative is conquered in the divine process of negating and reestablishing the universal unity. But this is done in the eternal which is the ground of every finite life. God affirms and negates the negative in eternity. This is the basis of all dialectics. Therefore the Trinity id dialectical, not paradoxical. Dialectics is the description of the life of atoms and plants and animals and persons and societies. They all have life processes of self identity, of alteration and return. They are positive and not illusory; they are the truth of becoming, which is not illusion but creativity, because it is rooted in the ground of all being. But this implies the possibility of evil in God and its reality in the creature.

God as Spirit and the Problem of Personality; and Personalistic Thinking in Protestantism and Bourgeois Society This concept of person has been applied to God and in popular distortion. He has become “a person”. Against this theology it should have been remembered that God was never called a person in classical tradition and that the trinitarian figures were called “personae” in the sense of “masks” or characters. The problem would not be so serious if it were not for the situation of prayer. The ego-thou-relation is essential for it. Therefore, God is not less than we. As

84

God as Reality and Symbol

the ground of everything personal he is also personal in relation to a person. This makes every prayer possible. And even the prayer of asking for something, meaning the elevation of something we want into the light of the eternal. But God also transcends the personal. Therefore in every prayer the contemplative element should be present, and sometimes become actual contemplation. The reason is that God as Spirit means that he is not-personal life, personal to personal life, and supra-personal to all life.

God as Power and Love The three symbols of the divine power are omni-potence, omni-presence, omniscience. All three of these are absurd if taken literally And this is one of the things which has undercut the valuation of the idea of God. The image of the omni-potent heavenly tyrant who can act according to his whims, creates a world with infinite misery, although he could have done otherwise. Omni-presence: no escape from him to any place whatsoever, even in the demonic hell. He transcends space. Omni-science: God is beyond the cleavage of subject and object. Eternal: He has experienced and endless past and will experience an endless future. He remembers everything and anticipates everything. But He transcends the category of time, but produces it creativity. In those ideas the literal becomes the blasphemous if thought through in an un-existential way.

Love and Compassion (Amida) The Christian idea of agape, symbolically applied to God. The emotional element is not decisive, but the affirmation of the person as a person in spite of his estrangement from the divine ground. The drive towards the reunion of the estranged, the healing of separation. But this is not possible in a sentimental way of disregarding the resistance. Love breaks what is against love. It is the conquest of love; the triumph of the ultimate over the finite; the affirmation of the freedom of the individual. It is the affirmative acceptance of the unacceptable. It has the Amida element but transcends it, with the element of justice. It is a good ending to my last lecture that I speak of love. After my two months visit, I go away with love for this country.

Spiritual Foundation of Democracy. First Lecture: Philosophical Foundations Introduction. Spiritual and sociological foundations. They are not exclusive: Special social groups are bearers of special [self interpretation] of men and his relation to the [encountered] world. This [refers to] myths, religious thought and [devotion], ethical ideals, [aesthetic] expressions, cognitive aims, moral and social practices, political methods. They all are related to a special sociological structure: Feudalism, [. . .], Absolutism, [bourgeois] society, neo-collective society. But the fact that something is related to a particular social system doesn’t exclude [this/its] objective validity as a possible interpretation of the meaning of life. Therefore we cannot [devaluate] an idea by relating it to a sociological structure. For this structure itself is a totality in which thought and artistic expression, social relations, [ethnics] and [politics] play a role. Nothing in it is only cause and nothing is only effect, it is a living structure, a Gestalt. (Reference to the personal Gestalt and the non-sense of [. . .] ideas from sublimated [drives]). But this does not mean that the ideas are the [one-sided] causes. The concept of “Gestalt” liberates from this primitive application of causality and the [unrefined] either, or “statements”.

Concepts of Individuality Introduction. Democracy has a special relation to the concept of individuality. One often says that the possibility of democracy is dependent on the development of the principle of individuality in the [subconscious] of at least the leading groups, ideally the whole nation. This is confirmed by my own experience with American democracy. Its [functioning] impressed me not in the technical method of continuous voting, but the attitude of acknowledging the other person as a person with the right of his individual opinions and [course] of action. This however cannot be imitated and the question arises: Individuality in which sense is the [presupposition] of democracy? There are different great concepts of individuality. 1. The first is universal, it is based on the fact that every human being has reason as the quality which distinguishes him from all other beings. Every single man must be considered as an individual bearer of reason and the possibility of freedom. This, of course, does not implie the nonsense [that] everyone is actually reasonable. But he is it potentially and he might become it actually. This then leads to the different concepts.

86

Spiritual Foundation of Democracy. First Lecture: Philosophical Foundations

a) The equalitarian educational concept. Everybody can be brought to a sufficient amount of rationality. 2. The second is the humanistic concept of individuality, not that in which they are equal, but in which [each] is unique, is decisive. This is rooted in the [understanding] of man as microcosmos, a [unique] [mirror] of the universe. He has within himself all potentialities of being, and is supposed to develop them in a most complete way. Here the question is: How is this related to the equalitarian individuality? This is [unequal. Is] it undemocratic? One type is the individualism of the intelligentsia. For humanistic development presupposes radical questioning. 3. Third, the dynamic concept of individuality: determined the will to actualize one-self and one’s particular passions, power, love, knowledge. This [is] conspicuous in Shakespeare: The figures are [bearers] of great passions which destroy them. To this group belong the explorers and empire-founders and [big] enterprise-creators and inventors [. . .] competitors. Here the problem [arises]: How much such freedom can a democracy tolerate? 4. The religious concept of individuality. It is based on the relation of the individual to the ultimate and not dependent on particular situations or abilities. Therefore, in this relation all human beings are equal. They all are children of God potentially and may become actually or they all have Buddha nature potentially and may actualize it. This vertical dimension is present in every situation of the horizontal plain. Therefore no democracy in most periods of Christian history, none in the periods of Buddhist history, never one in Islam. Therefore democratic leaders have attaqued [sic!] religion as antidemocratic while others think that there is no democracy without a religious foundation. This depends on the different types of religious individualization. [Thus] the deepest problem of Spirit and democracy. This is the second lecture. This lecture intenti[on]ally abstracting from the religious [foundation]. The inner conflicts of this kind of democracy.

Dêmo and Kratia Introduction. An excuse: The previous and following kinds of [. . .] seems to be very unrealistic. One may ask me instead to give advice, how democracy might [function], especially in countries like Germany and Japan, where democratic thinking is very young. But history has shown that the statesman can not succeede [sic!], if he separates himself from the principles of his action and follows the principles of [. . .]. This has ruined both, Germany and Japan, Bismarck and the militarists. Therefore [I] believe that the subject: Spiritual foundation [. . .] is

Dêmo and Kratia

87

[meaningful] and should be persued [sic!] without looking too only at practical consequences. 1. “Demos” in democracies. The external and internal limitations of demos. In the period of developing democracy a very slow extension took place, e. g. in England: Restrictions against women, against people without [landed] property, against people who do not pay a definite amount of taxes, everywhere against children and adolescents, against strangers, against completely uneducated, criminals, [. . .], [soldiers], etc. The realm of democracy can be extended to a certain degree, but never fully, and often new restrictions, like the racial ones, appear. 2. Decisive is the question of maturity [of] those who are not excluded. This leads to the democratic problem of education. The restrictions (e.g. in Athens) [were] largely connected with the state of education. Only a small minority were educated with the full power of humanist self development, not the slaves, the women, the children, only the few thousands of free citizens. The enlargement of technical education, in the 18th century: Public schools with reading and writing, and few [humanist] elements, some knowledge of history and some knowledge of nature. This [in mind], but is it a sufficient basis of democracy? To higher demands [. . .] more people were made, as in America, which has [an] egalitarian mass education on a comparatively high level. But the question is: Does this create rational individuals with the [sense of freedom] to make reasonable decisions about human affairs? Into [what] leads the education, after it has led out of the stage of rudeness and primitivity? How can it be avoided that [mass] education produces conformity? This is one of the great dangers of American democracy, because this is the basis for dictatorships by those who are able to use the mass-mind. Therefore the quest for vertical education in America, the humanistic idea of the individual in the sense of democratic leadership. In both Germany and Japan, it was the failure of those called for democratic leadership which ruined the new democracies and the nations. In Germany the upper classes inspite [sic!] of their humanist education worked for Hitler in the mistaken belief that he could reestablish their privileges. In Japan they fell to a militant nationalism. These facts, especially the German example, may lead to the question, wether [sic!] even the humanist leadership is not sufficient, if the humanism is lacking in a religious dimension. And perhaps it may be that even the danger of a conformist education of the masses (who are limited by personal and social limits) could conquer conformism by something ultimate breaking into it. Question for lecture II! Democracy is the rule of the demos. Which are the problems of this rule, not the technical, but the spiritual ones? The democratic method has two main elements: Majority and representation.

88

Spiritual Foundation of Democracy. First Lecture: Philosophical Foundations

Majority includes the idea that in the case of the [use] of [force] the majority would win – or that the majority represents a larger amount of wisdom – or that in the majority with the will of everybody, even the [. . .] participates. But the minority may not accept this rule, because of life and death interests. Then a revolutionary situation is created and the democratic structure may be destroyed as in the Fascist and Communist revolutions. This implies that a majority must be both strong and wise: If it is not strong the minority may represent the hidden desire of many who consciously still support the majority (as in the German republic). If the majority is strong, but not wise it drives the minority into despair and destructive explosions as in Russia. Counter-example is England, in which there is an unshaken, silent acknowledgment of the democratic methods of rule. It is not conformism or, as one could call it [patternisation], but it is conformity grown out of tradition and the [dignity] of strength and wisdom in the majorities. This shows the relation of historical destiny and democracy, [and] the impossibility of treating democracy as a technique [which] can be exported. Another problem of kratia in democracy is the system of representation. Even if the masses had [reached] the maturity for reasonable decisions, they cannot express them except by representatives, who become a power independent of the source of their power. This can lead to an estrangement in which the individual voter becomes indifferent, because he feels that he is excluded from every concrete decision. This emphasized if the concrete decisions are based on secret knowledge from which most people are excluded. This is a danger in all mass democracies. It looses the blood of the passionate participation of the people. This is partly a technical problem, partly a result of the will to power by secrecy of the burocracy. The burocratic contempt of the people even by the lower burocrats works against democracy. The problem of secrecy becomes absolute in the war; most democratic institutions are reduced or made ineffective under the threat from outside. There is no democracy in any army, and if the whole nation becomes an army not much is left of democracy. In the [. . .] this is not yet completely manifest, but it is already effective. So democracy is limited and threatened from all sides. It is a precious plant, [real] but fragile. It presupposes many conditions which may or may not be given. If it is planted under good conditions, it may become stronger and survive even bad conditions; but there is a limit, which can [. . .] passed. Then democracy dies or goes into hiding. But inspite [sic] of all this we call democracy great and precious. For it is rooted in the depths of man’s essential nature and is a healing power under the conditions of man’s estrangement from himself. Man is essentially free. He is not bound to the stimuli coming from the

Dêmo and Kratia

89

environment. Man breaks through them to a world, a meaningful structure which he can recognize and transform, in the power of his language. Freedom is the centered act of person, an act in which all elements of the personal [. . .] are effective, but in a centered unity who says with understanding: This is a [pine] tree has freedom. He is rational, he can deliberate and [decide], he has broken through the animal bondage to environment. [But then] how is this freedom which is the basis of all human culture, morality and religion, related to political freedom, and how is political freedom related to democracy? The first question is answered if we ask: Freedom for [what]? For the creation of the [new]. Every decision produces a [new] situation, it [ends] off other possibilities [it] changes reality at one point. Every thought goes [beyond] the given and creates something new. A human being is not able to create is dehumanized or sick. But question is: Does creativity in every direction belong to being human? Yes, if the simplest [. . .] are concerned, no, if a full development is meant [. . .] in a matter of few, the former a matter of all[.] [. . .] is the shaping of the [organisms] of human relations, everyone participates in it, even the prisoner and slave. If it is the [shaping] of a larger group, less and less people are creative in it. But if the decisions in the larger groups influence productively or destructively the creativity in the smaller groups, then the conflict [. . .] which drive towards democracy and towards [antidemocratic] reactions. And in these fights the whole [of] humanity is threatened. For suppression [of] political creativity can lead to a [drastic] [revolution] of all creativity, in the acts, in thought, in the law, in human relations, in economic [aims]. This is the [reason] for the bitterness of revolutionary struggles and [the] willingness to sacrifice a life which is threatened with dehumanization. The economic factor can be very strong but [it] is more a supporting than the decisive force. A well [. . .] [tyranny] [remains] a [means] of dehumanization if it [mutilates] creativity. Democracy, then, is an attempt to have a system of creative participation of everybody[,] to prevent the dehumanization by tyranny. But not every nondemocratic form of rule in tyranny. And there are forms of majority rule and representations which can become tyrannies themselves. Nevertheless, as long as democracy [works] there is a safety velve [sic!] built into the constitution, namely the power of withdrawing representatives and to overthrow a majority without the dangers always connected with a revolution. No other political system has this safety velve [sic!]. It can become tyrannical without a legal resistance and either dehumanize or drive towards explosion. We have seen the roots of democracy in man’s essential nature, we have seen it as a remedy against [. . .] forces of dehumanization in human existence. We [have] also seen its [. . .], limits and possible dis[tinc]tions. We now must ask the question of the forces [supporting] it, the preliminary and the [ultimate] ones.

Part B: Dialogue with Buddhist in Kyoto

Tillich encounters Japan During the visit to Japan last year of Dr. Paul Tillich, a number of interesting discussion were held in limited groups with Dr. Tillich as the chief participant. The Quarterly is pleased to publish the following transcripts of two of these discussions which were arranged by Dr. Tetsutaro Ariga and Prof. Sakae Kobayashi of The Christian center for the Study of Japanese Religions during the month of June. The transcripts were made from tape-recordings of the discussions and have been edited only to the extent of smoothing out certain grammatical constructions. In fairness to Dr. Tillich and the participants it should be noted that the discussions were informal and were not originally intended for publication, nor have the speakers had opportunity to check or revise the content. The following material, therefore, while largely verbatim, is presented without question marks. It is published in these pages in order to allow a larger circle of people to “listen in” on two of Dr. Tillich’s many discussions in Japan. (Edited by Robert W. Wood)

Dialogue 1 (The following conversation occurred on June 6 1960 at a meeting between Dr. Tillich and scholars and students of Otani University, the Jodo Shin Sect Buddhist university in Kyoto) Tillich: Earlier at our “metaphysical tea”, we had a question about the relationship of living Buddhism to the historical figure of Buddha, and I asked the question, “How do the different schools of Buddhism relate themselves to the historical Buddha?” And now I want to ask the more radical question, “If some historian should make it probable that a man of the name Gautama never lived, what would be the consequence for Buddhism?” I ask this question because during my whole scholarly life I have tried to answer the question of what would happen to Christianity if somebody could prove, in terms of probability of course, that Jesus could not be found in the police files of Nazareth in the years 1 to 30 A.D. I give the answer to what this would mean for the Christianity in my theology, and I say it would not mean anything. Others would say it means everything. This is the great discussion. Now, I am for this very reason much interested in this world for Buddhism. Buddhist: No historian has ever said that Gautama did not live, so in our Buddhist sects and schools his historicity has been assumed and each school of Buddhism believes that its doctrine of enlightenment has its roots in the enlightenment Gautama himself had.

94

Tillich encounters Japan

Tillich: Then I would also say that no serious historian has ever said that about Jesus either. But even if someone lived, from the standpoint of historical research we know so little about him that is probably true that this little doesn’t account for the tremendous effect he had on history. And the writings which follow him can be put under serious questioning, and someone may say that they are not very reliable records of what he actually he said. Now this is the real question, and I only wanted to make it as radical as possible. For if the one is doubtful, finally someone will appear and say that the other is doubtful too. The main question is, “If history comes to the same result that it comes in people like Albert Schweitzer or Bultmann today, that our historically probable knowledge about Jesus is almost nothing, would the same result with reference to Gautama mean very much to Buddhism?” So that, for instance, every Sutra (which would be similar to the Gospels in Christianity), would be questioned as probably not giving a reliable picture of what Buddha really meant. That was the real meaning of my question. Buddhist: Do you mean by your question, what weight does the figure of the historical Gautama have for Buddhism? If so, in Buddhism no doubt has ever been presented questioning the historical existence of Gautama, nor in regard to Gautama’s speaking of “causation”. But difference in interpretation does arise as to what is the real significance of Gautama’s speeches, and so each school has chosen certain Sutras which it finds most helpful in interpreting Gautama’s doctrine of causation. And so the problem is, what is the relation between the particular Sutras one school has chosen and those chosen by other schools. Thus there is no absolute difference between one particular school and others. Therefore the whole problem has been put in a different way from the way it is put by Christians for whom the oldest documents have been made the basis of their faith in Jesus. But in Buddhism that problem has never bothered people. In contrast, Buddhists have chosen the Sutras which are helpful to them in interpreting the doctrine of causation. Buddhist: According to the doctrine of Buddhism, the dharma kaya is eternal, and so it does not depend upon the historicity of Gautama. However, you question should be seriously acknowledged instead of glossed over. Tillich: Now I would like to ask another question. I see a great cleavage between Buddhism “on the top” – the founders, priests, monks, theologians and so on – and popular Buddhism. I have talked about this problem a very great deal since I have come to Japan, and previously in America I met and knew people like Suzuki, Hisamatsu and others. And my question is how is this thought “on the top” related to the popular beliefs of the ordinary adherent or follower of Buddhist teaching. In the Christian Middle Ages we had a similar cleavage, and there it was expressed in the doctrine of the fides implicita and

Dialogue 1

95

explicita. Only the priests, theologians, etc., had explicit knowledge of Christianity, and the lower classes believed what the Church believed and told them. And they lived in a very primitive way. And this is partly still the case in the Roman Church. But in the 16th century a new class came into existence, the higher and lower middle classes, and they were neither “on the top” nor at the bottom (popular religion) of the religious realm. Under the impact of this social class the Reformation arose and abolished many, if not most, of the usages which belonged to popular religion in order to make Christianity understandable for the thinking laymen of the middle class. Now my question is, “Is there in Buddhism anything which is comparable to this – a bridging between popular religion which always and easily becomes superstitious and demonized, and “ the top” which is beyond the concrete and which has a direct relationship to the Buddha principle or to the Ultimate principle?” I do not see any such movement which is comparable to the Reformation in Christianity, may be ignorant about it, so I am very eager to hear but I an answer to this question from this group. Buddhist: What do you mean by the demonization or distortion of religion? Tillich: Many things. For instance, the identification of a special sacred object with the Holy itself – what usually is called idolatry – is one of them. For example, not realizing that a statue of Buddha points not only beyond the statue, but also beyond the historical Buddha, to the Ultimate. Or the belief that special practices, such as saying certain prayers mechanically, have an effect on divine powers for help, so that these divine powers becomes servants to man instead of men becoming servants to the gods. Or the identification of the Divine with mere destructiveness, as we find it in some gods or powers or rituals where the destructive element is predominant and is not conquered by the creative element. Now all of these things happen in popular religion and are often reason why the thinking middle classes turn away from religion altogether. And so the question is, “What does the upper leadership of Buddhism do in order to overcome this and to enable the thinking middle classes to receive Buddhism?” Buddhist: Buddhism is not a system of doctrines but is primary an experience. So all that matters in Buddhism is to have a Buddhistic experience. That is, it is something like taking a medicine; you may not be informed of the prescription, but you may take it without knowing what the ingredients are. Buddhist literature tries to explain what it means, but this knowledge is not important. Tillich: Well, that is precisely the fides implicita. Now let me ask a question in connection with this “experience”. Is it possible that there is a distorted, a falsified, experience in the realm of Buddhism? That is, is there, as the Reformers said, a distorted experience, an experience which is still experience of the Holy but experienced in a distorted way, for instance in an idolatric way? This is the meaning of my question.

96

Tillich encounters Japan

Buddhist: Buddhism has also had its Reformation, for instance in the case of the Shin Sect and also in the case of Zen Buddhism. Zen has de-demonized Buddhism. While in Buddhism prior to the rise of Zen and Shin there have been distorted forms of Buddhism – magical or idolatric or demonic – there is nothing like that in Shin or Zen. So in these latter forms Buddhism has actually been reformed. But in understanding this point it is important to note the difference between Eastern and Western history, or Japanese and European history. In the 13th century in Japan the reformation movements did not arise in connection with the life of the middle classes, while in the 16th century in Europe the Reformation did so. Buddhist: In the West at the time of the Reformation it was the intellectuals, the educated people, who supported the Reformation. But in Japan it was not necessarily the intellectuals who supported the reformation movements of the 13th century. To be sure, Zen was much more intellectualistic and was more or less supported by the higher intellectuals, and only later did it penetrate into the lower and middle classes as these classes arose. But on the other hand, Shin Buddhism arose not among the intellectuals but among the more ignorant common people – the peasants and lower classes. Only Shin Buddhism could get rid of the magical and demonic elements. Why? Because of its emphasis upon personal faith in the grace of Amida Buddha. In this faith people rooted their concern in the Ultimate. And this faith although it did not consist in intellectual understanding, yet involved certain intellectual elements such as hearing the preaching of Buddha’s Law, somewhat similar to the hearing of the Gospel in Christianity. And through this hearing of the preaching of the Law the Shin Buddhist could engage in self-criticism. Thus, in this way even the peasants could have a quite deep religious experience. Buddhist: Shinran himself, who initiated this Shin movement, had deep philosophical and metaphysical foundations to his system. Therefore, the preaching of the Law was not simply a preaching Gospel but also involved profound metaphysical implications. Buddhist: What has been said has been from an ideal point of view, for in Shin and Zen Buddhism there is still something magical and demonic. Tillich: This is a different question. I can understand how it is that a Jew, a Christian, or a Muslim prays, because praying always leads people to another ego, a Thou, and it is thus an ego-thou relationship. To whom does someone pray on the basis of Buddhism? I understand very well that a Buddhist can meditate, and I believe that in Christianity meditation is far too much neglected because the personal symbolism of the Divine has overlaid the suprapersonal in much Christian thinking, especially in a country like the United States where the tradition of personalism is so strong. But on the other hand, in the official

Dialogue 1

97

doctrine and theological background of Buddhism the personal element is almost swallowed by the suprapersonal element – let’s call it the Buddha principle or the Amida principle, but not a figure which can be looked at like a person. Nevertheless, there is much prayer going on. How can this be united with the fundamentals of Buddhist theory? Or, to formulate the question more precisely, “To whom does a Buddhist pray if he prays instead of meditating?” Buddhist: In the Shin sect, unlike other schools of Buddhism, there is not much emphasis upon meditation, and no emphasis whatsoever on prayer. Shin refuses to pray and denies the whole concept of prayer; it admits only an expression of gratitude or thanksgiving for the grace of Amida Buddha. Buddhist: This is true in Shin but not in Buddhism in general. There are certainly prayers offered to Buddha, bhodisatvas, even to Shinto gods, but this practice has been made possible by the belief that Buddhahood has manifested itself in human form. So whatever may be the figure to whom one prays, one actually prays to the spirit of Buddha. Tillich: I am very interested in what you say, that Shin Buddhism does not accept prayer except for the prayer of thanksgiving. The Ritschlian school in Protestant theology in the 19th century, by reason of Kantian philosophy, also said it is superstition to ask anything of God, and on this ground they criticized the prayer of supplication as asking for something, as influencing God to give something. Of course, advanced theology has always denied this interpretation and has said that the prayer of supplication means bringing one’s daily life concerns into the life of the Eternal without the desire to influence it. And I would say in criticism of this Ritschlian school, and at the same time of this “escape” (I would call it) of Shin Buddhism, that even if you give thanks, you give thanks not to an “it” but always to a “thou”. This does not mean, of course, that there is somewhere a Being, but that you have a vision of the Divine in personal form even when you give thanks. I will tell you a little story. A friend of my grandfather, a very rich Jew who was one of the very secular Jews one found very often around 1900, told my grandfather that he must have a God in order to thank Him when he had some great joy; he said he must have someday to thank if he had a great joy for which he could not thank any human being, but which had been given him by Providence or destiny. And this was, so to speak, his argument for God. Now I tell this story only because it shows that even prayer of thanksgiving includes some ego-thou relationship. In meditation you can have feelings of thanks – that can happen; but if you have a prayer of thanksgiving, then you cannot escape the personalized “thou”. (At this point the discussion closed with mutual expressions of gratitude.)

98

Tillich encounters Japan

Dialogue 2 (The following discussion took place on June 7, 1960 at a meeting or Dr. Tillich with friends and supporters of the Christian Center for the Study of Japanese Religions in the Kyoto area. Dr. Tillich had been asked to begin the discussion with a few words on his concept of the “demonic”.) Tillich: If a concrete holy object is made into the Holy itself, then religion is demonized, because every finite reality which claims infinite value significance, obedience, commitment, and so on, necessarily comes into conflict with other finite realities which have the same ultimate validity and non-validity, and so the demonic is always destructive. And it is always destructive of justice. I want to introduce this word “justice” here. We do justice not only to human beings, but also to objects in nature and to ideas and to values. If we adhere, for instance, to one god in Greek mythology, to Dionysius, we do injustice to Apollo, and vice versa. And out of this injustice against the unity of the values or powers of being a destruction of the one by the other in our mind follows. This destruction expresses itself as the split consciousness. And what is our criticism as Christians of polytheism? There is no reason why there should not many gods. Why is the number 1 better than the number 20 or 3, as it is in many religions? There is no reason for this except the one reason that if there is not one god, then each special god claims ultimacy. And therefore the problem of polytheism is the same problem of everything demonic, namely the split consciousness. Now this can happen on the highest level as well as on the lowest level. It can happen in a kind of Jesus-piety which makes Jesus as an individual or finite character according to the Christian creed into an absolute. This was first done by the disciples, and Jesus reacted very strongly against them when they tried to do it. Only the crucified is absolute; this means, he who has surrendered his finitude. If we take it on the lowest level, we have the fetish, the statues, the sculptures and pictures everywhere in temples where popular piety confuses what is Holy itself, the Ultimate, with the preliminary, namely, the wonderful Buddhist statue and so forth. In the moment in which prayer is offered to the picture or sculpture or even to Buddha as an individual being, then, of course, it is idolatry. And so I would say that the demonization of religion and its destructive consequences go through all religions. The Reformation was the great Christian attack on the demonic in the Roman Church, namely, the identification of the Holy itself with the pope; this was the attack by Luther. It was not the doctrine of justification – that was the occasion. The decisive point was in the talk at Leipzig, where the man who talked with Luther, Dr. Eck, said “But the Councils have decided this way, so you cannot disagree.” And Luther then said

Dialogue 2

99

in the name of the Christian message itself as it is in the Bible, “I disagree.” And thus the break between Catholicism and Protestantism emerged. I call this the demonic claim of the Roman Church. And when Protestant Orthodoxy did the same thing not much later, then the breaking away from this Orthodoxy was also the breaking away from an often very destructive absolutism, although the latter was not as important or as powerful as that of the Roman Church. And so we have the demonic in the whole history of religion. And here in Japan in the paganism around us we have it in a very definite way, and I will perhaps speak later on about the result of my talks with Buddhists about the demonic, and it may be very interesting. But before doing so I will first stop and get more questions about the problem. Participant: Would you tell us what your conclusions were following your talks with these Buddhists? Tillich: A priori you should not say “conclusions”. Have you ever heard any discussion come to conclusion? This was most clear in my discussion today. I had asked the following questions which I had developed before I went to the meeting. 1) how do the leading Buddhists deal with popular piety: a) in keeping it alive and making in spiritually effective; b) in countering the dangers of mechanization, superstition and demonization. 2) And then a second question which belongs to the first: Is there any event in Buddhism which is comparable to the Reformation, and any group which is comparable to Protestantism? These were the questions, and then Mr. Hisamatsu, whom I have known and liked personally and spiritually for many years, gave the answer; but this answer was not satisfactory at all. It was that they would not call anything mechanized, superstitious or demonized. Actually, he dismissed these three concepts and said that the most primitive piety (which I would label with these three predicates) could be the way of awakening the Buddha spirit in every human being. Now in this way the whole of popular piety, if I understand him rightly, was left so much to itself without help from the religious leaders that I had a feeling my question was quite to the point and that he either could not answer it or set the question aside because it was not a problem for him. Now this happened today, and it happened in a similar way yesterday when I had a discussion with about 20 Buddhist scholars and 50 students in Otani University. There it was very similar, for the answer was, I would say, a negation of the question. Participant: What were your reason for asking these particular questions in this form rather than other questions? Tillich: Because this is my main interest. You see, a discussion about being and non-being also occurred this afternoon, and it was in the usual manner of philosophical discussion – I could have done that in Cambridge as well as

100

Tillich encounters Japan

here. What I want to understand here in Japan is the actual religious power or non-power of Buddhism. I am after this all the time. And the question came to my mind the first time when I was in Kamakura. There I saw the Buddha statue and the people, and I asked myself, “How would the two Buddhists whom I know and love, Mr. Hisamatsu and Mr. Suzuki, react to this; how do they feel about this?” I was always pursuing this. For instance, in my first discussion with Buddhist scholars in Tokyo just three days after I arrived in Japan I asked the question, “Is Buddhism a living religion?” And this was a rather bold question to ask of Buddhist scholars. So you see my interest is not to discuss on the level of being and non-being or of pantheism and theism, but on the level of actual religious experience. Now yesterday we had the word “experience”, and one of the men answered that all of these are “religious” experiences in these popular religions. Then I asked the question whether there could be a distorted experience, and I don’t know whether I got any answer to this. I do not feel that I did. And I think that what Mr. Hisamatsu said today indicates that he does not believe there is a distorted experience. If there is a religious experience, even on the lowest level or what we would call superstition, it would seem to be valid because it may be an awaking of the Buddha spirit within us. Participant: In Zen Buddhism I was wondering if the experience which transcends being and non-being is a thing which is made ultimate. Is there thus the chance that the demonic is present on the highest level of Zen Buddhism in making the experience of transcending being and non-being into an ultimate when there really is not an ultimate in Zen? Tillich: In the case I would be on the side of the Buddhist because I feel that a monastic discipline and meditation which has no consequences for practical life is itself a demonization of the religious sphere against the secular sphere. It is very interesting that in the Roman Church in the Middle Ages the monks were called the “religiosi”; they were those who represented religion. And Luther said against this that the maid cleaning the house is as valuable in the mind of God as all the monks together. There I see a demonization of religion. And so I would be on the side of the Buddhist who is not guilty of this sin, I would say. On the other hand, there is a danger in Buddhism which lies in the inner situation of meditation itself – that is, that the tremendous elevation of the ego-valuation, the self-conscious affirmation of oneself as being, may be identified with the Buddha spirit. This is the temptation of the saint in the Catholic Church. And it is a very frequent religious danger – making one’s own ego into an absolute. Just yesterday Mr. Kobori said that this is also a tremendous danger in Zen Buddhism, that it raises the self beyond its necessary limitation. So here we have a great analogy between Catholic saintliness and Zen Buddhist saintliness

Dialogue 2

101

– but also an awareness of the danger in both cases. For of course the Catholic penitential monks know this well – they know how dangerous it is to be a monk because of religious arrogance, which then would mean demonic possession by self-elevation, by religious arrogance, by hybris. I must say, when I look at the whole situation out here, that I am grasped by the similarities between the Roman Catholic Church and all that I meet here in Buddhism, and Shintoism, so that I often wonder why Christianity has taken all this into it – how does it happen in spite of the Christian foundation of Christianity? Participant: What sort of differences did you find between Shinto and Buddhism? Tillich: Shinto is a riddle to me. In Shinto there are problems which I was not able to find out about. There is first the relationship to the State and the nation, which still exists in spite of the official separation. And the fact that I was told in the Ise Shrine two days ago by the priest there that more than 50% of the nation at least once during their lifetime come to the Ise Shrine from all over the Japan. Now what does this mean? I could not get this from him because my categories simply are not sufficient tools to grasp the situation here. One thing is clear; it is a religious reverence for the emperor representing the nation, but it is religious and non-religious at the same time, and the unity is so strange. Even under Nazism this unity was only present for some crazy people; otherwise it did not exist. But I have great difficulty understanding what is going on in the peasant who comes from the northern islands with great difficulty and financial loss in order to visit this shrine once in his lifetime. Now in Catholicism and Buddhism they do the same thing, but there it is unambiguously related to divine figures. But in Shinto it is not related to divine figures; it is related to the Emperor’s spirit or to the nation or something like that. When I asked about this more urgently, then it is my impression they said that of course the Emperor and the nation are representations of something more universal. One of the higher symbols is the Sun Goddess from whom the Emperor is born, but the Sun Goddess, according to what one priest said two days ago, is more a symbol of the Emperor than a real figure to which we pray. So this line, too, doesn’t lead to much. Now another line is the Shinto pantheon, and this I understand much better because there are religious motifs everywhere in the history of religions in which the divine is seen as potentially in everything and actually in special outstanding objects, events, persons, and so on, but always as representing the universe – although they don’t speak of the transcendent one, except as they are influenced by Buddhism. But if they are not, then it seems to me this is much more a primitive mama religion – the presence of the holy substance everywhere and

102

Tillich encounters Japan

concentrated on special points. Now, this is my analysis up until today, but it might be different tomorrow because the impressions come upon me like waves, and I may be wrong in this analysis. Participant: This is another kind of question. When you analyze the religious situation in the West you have not necessarily interpreted this religious situation in terms of an organized religion, the church, priesthood, etc. But here in Japan you seem to be concentrating on the organized religions. If you were going to be here for a much longer time would you include much more than those organized religions in your analysis of the religious situation? Tillich: Certainly. Participant: If this is so, is our concern as Christians primarily with our relation to those organized religions of Buddhism and Shintoism or with the broader “religious situation” as we find it in Japan? Tillich: Of course the latter, which includes, for instance, the whole problem of secularism. You know that my interest in the West always has been in the different forms of the secular world, and I have spoken of the “latent Church” in the secular world. I believe there are similar realities in this country. But it happens that I have been confronted here only from the other side. I see the secular world in the streets, but I have not seen it from the inside. I have not had a discussion here with anyone who represented a radical humanistic or naturalistic point of view. Participant: I have another question. We were visiting a Zen temple with a fairly important priest, and we asked him what a little Shinto Shrine was doing in his garden. He explained it by saying it was put there when the temple was built because in Buddhism we have no way of guarding against earthquake, fire, flood, or damage, and it was necessary to call upon the protection of the Shinto gods when building the temple. Tillich: This I can only explain as that they don’t care. They say even this can help to awaken the Buddha spirit. The different embodiments of the Holy don’t matter at all – this is always my impression in these discussions. I asked someone, in this regard, about Hitler (who was the divine voice or mouthpiece for believing Nazis), whether one doesn’t have to fight against Hitler. And this the question caused him great distress because he felt, on the other hand, it was inhuman to say not to fight against Hitler, while on the other hand he had no theoretical foundation on which to fight Hitler as a demonic distortion of holiness. The conflict occurs if one says that everything can be a means of salvation, so to speak. This inner conflict I see in Buddhism. But I still have not heard from you whether my analysis of Shintoism is justified. What is the religious element in Shintoism? This is very confusing, and it should be one of the main points of study, for it even has political implications. Shinto is not

Dialogue 2

103

primitivism, even though they say that they give the primitives an occasion to grasp the universe with primitive means. Participant: My impression of modern Shinto apologies which I have seen is that they are anything but primitive. They seem to have borrowed heavily from other philosophies, ideologies, and Christian theology, and to have put together a patchwork theology which does not seem to have any organic connection with Shintoism as I understand it. Participant: In a certain way it has this connection. But the main difficulty with Shinto is its lack of concern with moral issues. For the matter, Buddhism also lacks this concern with moral issues. Participant: Dr. Tillich, if you define religion in terms of man’s ultimate concern, what can be pointed to as distinctively religious in Shinto as over against the religion of the secular atheist? Tillich: I know what ultimate concern is in European humanism; it is the fulfillment of all human potentialities. Or in the more radical movements of humanism, the socialist movement, it was the coming of a state of classless society or justice. And so there were always ultimate concerns, and therefore there is no irreligion. The irreligious is impossible, because even if the ultimate concern is to fight against religion, this is a religious concern as we have always seen – that is, when one fights against religion fanatically not diplomatically. And so we can say there is no such thing as irreligion. But then the question becomes, what should be the symbol of the Ultimate? And this leads to the different religions – why Christ (not Jesus) and not Buddha? But in Shinto I simply do not know what this ultimate concern is. In some statements it is the universe, in some it is the spirit of Emperor, in some it is the Sun Goddess; now, what is it? Participant: Probably part of the difficulty is that it includes all of these to some extent. Participant: Yes, for in Shinto, “kami” may mean anything that has numenous power, whether it is a tree or a lock or anything. Tillich: Yes, I was asked about this word “kami”. We might ask what is the real “kami”, and you would say there is no real “kami” for there are many “kami”. And so we come to the demonization of polytheism or of something transitory like the spirit of the Emperor. It is different when we speak of the universe, because there we have something which transcends every special finite. But how far it transcends, what they really mean when they say universe, whether it is Deus sive natura, God or nature in the sense of Dionysius Areopagitus, that I do not know. Participant: Shinto believes in spirits which are in nature (or which are the basis of nature) and also in the spirits of the ancestors. In the theology of Shinto

104

Tillich encounters Japan

these spirits of nature and the spirits of the ancestors are mingled together so that these two kinds of spirit form a sort of kingdom. And to that extent we may compare the Shinto pantheon to the Greek pantheon. And thus by itself it may not be undemocratic; it could be democratic, except, for the fact that in Shinto the spirits of the Imperial ancestors are apart from other spirits so that the whole nation is required to pay special obediance to the Imperial ancestors. And this is the root of a possible Japanese absolutism. But for this factor, the Shinto pantheon by itself would be harmless. Participant: Is this a recent development in Shinto, or is this at its very roots? For there are periods in Japanese history when the Emperor was shunted aside completely. At these time did Shinto possess this absolutism, or is this latter something which was created in the modern period? Participant: Even when the Imperial Household lost its actual power, the Shinto concept of the authority of the Emperor remained. But only in the period after the Meiji Restoration do we have an actual absolutism in the name of the Emperor. Prior to that there was not so much. Tillich: May I ask a question? What does Christian missions mean here in Japan? What are its objects? This is one side of the question. The other side is, what are the methods? And the third question is, what is the aim? I would like even tentative answers so that I can see the function of the Christian missionaries and the exiting Christian churches in Japan, which I do not yet see. I see them as little enclaves – little islands in the ocean. But this is not what they want to be. Participant: I think anyone would hesitate to answer your question because there is no authoritative answer that is set up by any church or body. A conversation occurs to me which I had this afternoon with a Christian pastor who was saying that he felt the responsibility of the Church in Japan was to create persons of outstanding moral and spiritual character – people who would, by the strength of their beings, transform Japan. I think this is one definition – which is saying that the object is individuals and behind them the whole nation; that the methods are primarily the encounter of person with person within the context of the Church which serves as a nourishing community. Tillich: This “within the Church” means not with people outside, with Buddhist and so forth? Participant: This pastor represents one large tradition in the Japanese Church, the Presbyterian tradition – that nature for him comes within the fellowship of the Church, although he is not completely enmeshed within the life of this Church but is called to stand as a person within society and be constantly engaged in the office, factory, school, and political arena with others. He spoke specifically of the necessity of having conversations with Buddhists, but his primary concern at that point was to come to an understanding of the Gospel

Dialogue 2

105

which would be somewhat determined by the life of the nation in which we stand. Buddhism represents the tradition of Japan in many ways. We cannot have a true Christian message which is separate from it. You ask for the aim of this. I think the aim certainly is the development of persons who stand in an eternal dimension, and the transformation of the nation. I think this is one definition of what the mission of the Church is in the country, although it is certainly not the only one. Tillich: Are there others? Participant: Before I came to Japan, you met with some missionaries at the Yale Language School and I remember that you said, “You aren’t talking the Kingdom with you; the Kingdom is already there.” That is, the Kingdom has come, even though no one has spoken about it. I am afraid that for me, if this were true, there would be no reason for being here. Somehow or other, in thinking about the Cross, it doesn’t seem to make sense unless there is separation, such a great separation, between creation and God that at one time it had to be bridged – and it was bridged by Jesus. Now there again I find that the historical Jesus is very important to me, and that if we lose him we have nothing really – we would no longer have the power that the Christian massage has. It is in this context, that this man bridged this gap, that power, new power, came in. and therefore I think that our task is to expose people to the one who bridged the gap because through him this new power can come. Perhaps this runs the risk of becoming demonic because of this person in the center. But if this Kingdom is just here, whether or not the one who bridged it is known, I don’t see any sense for the Christian movement coming to a foreign country. Tillich: I don’t think this is the alternative. The kingdom of God is fighting in history everywhere. It is fighting in the tremendous inner spiritual experiences of the Buddhists as well, and even in primitive peoples sometimes, or perhaps even more so there. But the criterion is lacking. And I would call “Jesus as the Christ”. The criterion for the Kingdom, and this criterion is the ultimate victory over the demonic powers. I think that the need of the missionary enterprise is to say this. I believe there could not be special revelation if there were not universal revelation, and that everywhere the Kingdom of God is fighting. But in the figure of Christ, the criterion for the victory and the victorious power have come. But when I say this, is it possible simply to think in terms of converting individuals into the Christian Church? Is this the only way, or are there other ways? And this would bring us from the question of the aim to the second question, the tools. Here my anxiety is a double one. The one is that it is impossible to bring American or Swiss or German Christianity to Japan. If you do that, you do something which simply must be resisted by such a highly

106

Tillich encounters Japan

cultivated nation as the Japanese nation. How can they subject themselves to the much less highly developed American civilization? It is impossible! This is one part of my anxiety. The other is the Biblical orthodoxy which I have a feeling Mr. Hendrik Kreamer advertised in the name of Barthianism. I think these two ways are to be avoided. The one is the way of orthodox preaching which doesn’t even ask what the categories of reception are in the people. The missionaries to the Greeks and to the Hellenistic world asked very clearly what kind of categories could be used. Paul says that directly – becoming a pagan to the pagans and to the Jews a Jew. That is the one side. And therefore I ask for a way which is neither the way of American civilization, including Christianity, nor the way of a Biblical orthodoxy which cannot be received because the organs for this kind of language do not exist. What is the way between them? Participant: Most of us here are as fearful as you about the dangers of importing an American or Continental Christianity – we wrestle with this problem daily. But where and how do we come to grips with this culture? Again and again you return to the question of our relations as Christians with Buddhists and Shintoists. But can we enter by this door? For it seems to me that the effective religions, the real ultimate concerns, of most people in Japan are not expressed so much in terms of these organized religions as in terms of something similar to what is found in the West, that is, a kind of secularism. Instead of looking first to these organized religions, we see more clearly when we look for the effective religions here – when we encounter man as man and not man as a Buddhist – when we meet man as man and man and not man in this culture with all of its needs, virtues, illness, concerns. The object is man as man – and what is introduced is not Christianity as an ambigious amalgam of Western culture, but Christianity as the dialogue between man and the Lord of man, Jesus Christ. This, it seems to me, is the area of real encounter, and not the encounter of Christianity with these other religious systems as systems. Tillich: How can you massage this? If you speak to somebody, a businessman, let us say, as a missionary you always represent a religion – you don’t represent business as a Christian, but you represent the Church as a Christian. I could imagine that a Christian businessman could speak with another businessman, and that this matter then would be easy. But if you speak, then the question of religion cannot be eliminated, because you are a minister. Participant: But is this not the same problem you faced in Germany in the 1920’s as you sought to open up a dialogue between Christianity and culture, with the socialist movement, and to interpret it religiously to itself? You did not enter first into dialogue with the organized religious institutions themselves which you often criticized as heteronomous. Participant: I would like to endorse what has just been said by giving an

Dialogue 2

107

explanation of our concrete situation, because I am a Japanese who has become a Christian. Our traditional religions, both Buddhism and Shinto, claim they are religious of the people. Shinto has always been regarded as the real religion of the nation, and also during the Tokugawa period all Japanese subjects had to register in Buddhist temples in their communities. So both Shinto and Buddhism claim practically the whole nation as their adherents. But the fact is that modern Japanese, practically the majority of them, have drifted away from their ancestral religions. So many young Japanese today are quite free from their ancestral religions, and they are spiritually lost. They are not bound to any particular religious tradition consciously. Of course, whenever they are asked what their religion is, they always answer that their families are Buddhists or Shintoist. But very seldom does one answer that he or she is Buddhist or Shintoist. That is the general situation in which we find ourselves as Japanese. So when the Gospel of Jesus Christ is presented to the Japanese people, it means that the Gospel is presented to an individual of the secular world. Participant: But even if people may not consider themselves affiliated with Shintoism or Buddhism, just as when the Westerner leaves the Church the psychological bent of his past history stays with him, so even when you are talking with the secular man in Japan you have to know about Buddhism and Shintoism in order to speak relevantly to him, because he still carries these things with him. But I want to ask Dr. Tillich if we don’t have to swim against the stream as Christians no matter where we are. I don’t see why the problem is limited to Japan. You yourself said in one of your lectures how thoughtful Americans are fighting the depersonalization of advertizing. Concerning this idea that to bring something in that is foreign is bad, I wonder if the Christian faith isn’t always a “fist” and if you aren’t always having to fight your way, whether you belong to a country that has supposedly had the Christian faith for centuries or whether you are a member of a nation where the dominant religious traditions are different. Tillich: I would agree. You see, I wrote in the last chapter of my latest book, The Theology of Culture, on how to communicate the Gospel, about this problem of the offense of Christianity. And I agree that there always must be offense. But the real method of communication is to put the wrong offenses aside and to bring the people before a real decision, not a decision about some elements of German or American culture or about some special theological tenets, but about the real decision for and against the ultimate which is really the Ultimate. Now if you can do this, then I think this problem is solved as far as it is humanly possible. So I agree about the offense in the Gospel. But now we come to the point, in the West as well as the here, as to what is the justified offense and what is the unjustified offense. I would, for instance, say it is unjustified to

108

Tillich encounters Japan

claim that one must accept the doctrine of the Trinity or the doctrine that Jesus was the Son of God and to throw them as stones at the heads of people, for both are completely misunderstood even by theologians. Now that is not the right offense. But the right offense is to accept the demand of ultimate seriousness, of the Ultimate, as it is seen in the picture of Jesus in the Gospels. Now I am afraid that one side brings wrong offenses in terms of a completely observed orthodoxy, and the other side in terms of moral and conventional attitudes of Protestant moralistic Christianity as we have it especially in America. And I would say that if you have, for instance, the problem of smoking and drinking and such American nonsense, I would say it is incredible to bring this to Japan. Participant: Would you call it a “stone” to ask for a personal decision or commitment or affirmation to the Lordship of Christ? Tillich: If you say it in the way, I do not even know what it means. I mean that is such a complicated, half-pietistic, half-orthodox phrase that I simply do not know what it means. “Lordship” can mean complete heteronomy, and if it means heteronomy I would reject it as demonic indeed. But it can also mean the acceptance of Him who said, “My yoke is easy . . .” – that means there is no heteronomy. And these are two completely different interpretations of this phrase. So you see how difficult this is; it is much more difficult than such a formula would indicate. Participant: Is it allowable, then, in talking with a Buddhist? Tillich: I wouldn’t speak to any Buddhist about the Lordship of Christ, because I wouldn’t even say it to an American Christian. Participant: Would you use it in the way that you interpret it? Tillich: It wouldn’t be a kind of formula (which is rather indigestible – such as the phrase “Jesus is the Son of God”). These are impossible formulations which must be completely and newly taught and interpreted; and if they are not, then they are the wrong offenses. There must be a decision; I do not want to escape the decision. But I want only to escape formulas which make the negative decisions so easy. Participant: Yes, but content must be put into the term Christ. And I would like to ask what content is put into it. Tillich: Now that depends upon the discussion. In America we have a Christian secularism; here we have Buddhist and Shintoist secularism. Every secularism is dependent upon the religious tradition, even as Greek secularism was dependent upon Dionysius and Apollo (although these gods long ago disappeared as gods, but their power was still in Greek secularism) in the philosophical attitude and the ecstatic attitude of the Greeks. So we have the same thing here. And we have to find out where you can bring people before the right decisions. Now that is what I do in my home missions or apologetics in the colleges and

Appendix

109

universities when I teach and preach. And I think that could be done here in a different way, in view of the fact that here the substance of secularism is not Christian nor Greek but something else. It is the Buddha or something other thing. Now how can the Christian message penetrate into this secularism in such a way that the people are really put before existential decisions, decisions where they are not asked to kill their intellects (for these last are demonic decisions) but to give their ultimate concern to the really Ultimate? That is what has to be done, as well as to show that what they have is not really the Ultimate.

Appendix (A talk by Dr. Paul Tillich given before the study of Japanese religions Group at the Seiken Kaikan on June 7, 1960 on) There is a problem in plural gods – which makes for a split personality. On the highest level is christ; the lowest level is the statues and pictures being worshipped. Martin Luther’s decisive point was the matter of the worship of the Pope. This was the demonic claim of the Catholic Church. Paganism has demonism in a definite form. (Mr. Hisamatsu said that the whole popular piety is left to itself and the leaders do not lead in Japanese religions.) At Otani University in Kyoto, when Dr. Tillich spoke, some of the audience dismissed Dr. Tillich’s questions on demonism, but others tried to answer to him. They were unable to. Tillich tries to find reactions of the leading Buddhists as to their actual religious experiences. Can these be distorted experiences? Demonization takes place in the “Religiöse” orders of the Catholic Church. Zen meditation raises the self above the worship of the higher spiritual values. Both are subject to demonic possession. Tillich felt, for the first time, that he was in pagan world. In Shinto there is much that is hard to find out about, but Buddhism is easier to grasp. Tillich’s categories are not enough to encompass Shintoism. Catholics want to worship certain divine figures, but it is not exactly so with the Shinto worship at Ise. Shinto religious pantheism is more easily understood. With the Holy substance everywhere, Shinto is much like Catholicism. The religious situation includes secularism, as in the West, and missionaries are concerned with the entire situation.

110

Tillich encounters Japan

The Buddhist priest is concerned only with arousing the Buddhist spirit. The followers of Hitler and his demonic interpretation of the highest voice was demonic possession. Shintoists say they give an opportunity to primitive minds something which they can grasp. (Prof Ariga: Both Buddhists and Shintoists ignore morals and are thus deficient.) What is the Ultimate concern of Shintoism? Irreligion is an impossibility because to fight against religion is still a religious concern. In Shintoism there is no real “Kami”, which makes for a demonization of “kami”.

Answers to Questions Shinto is like a pantheon, with spirits as the basis of nature and which our ancestors – all mingled together. This could be democratic except for the fact that the spiritual Impecial Family members are above all other spirits. a) Who are the objects? b) What are the aims? c) What are the name? in Christian Missions? “Jesus-as-the-Christ” is necessarily connected and used together. The bringing of Western Christianity to Japan is impossible. Dr. Fosdick’s theology and orthodox preaching cannot be used in Japan. Christianity must always be an offense, but the wrong offense must be eliminated and the right and justified offense must be passed. The wrong offenses are doctrines, and the right office is to press for the Ultimate. “Lord” is harmony and to be rejected. “Pat” Christian phrases are usually demonic, undigested. And to give them to Buddhists is worse them demonic. But to state them simply is not demonic. One must avoid formulae. Is there a difference between the highly educated people and the lesser educated toward Christianity? (at this point the taperecorder began to act up, and I was able to make no more notes.) L.G. 7/6/60

A talk by Dr. Paul Tillich given before the Study of Japanese Religious Group at the Seiken Kaikan on June 7, 1960 on The Demonic Problem: Demonization of Religion There is a problem in plural gods – which makes for a split personality. On the highest level in Christ; the lowest level is the statues and pictures being worshiped. Martin Luther’s decisive point was the matter of the worship of the Pope. This was the demonic claim of the Catholic Church. Paganism has demonism in a definite form (Mr. Hisamatsu said that the whole popular piety is left to itself and the leaders do not lead in Japanese religions.) At Otani University in Kyoto, when Dr. Tillich spoke, some of the audience dismissed Dr. Tillich’s questions on demonism, but others tried to answer him. They were unable to. Tillich tries to find reactions of the leading Buddiste as to their actual religious experiences. Can these be distorted experiences? Demonization takes place in the “Religiöse” orders of the Catholic Church. Zen meditation raises the self above the worship of the higher spiritual values. Both are subject to demonic possession. Tillich felt, for the first time, that he was in a pagan world. In Shinto there is much that is hard to find out about, but Buddhism is easier to grasp. Tillich’s categories are not enough to encompass Shintoism. Catholics want to worship certain divine figures, but it is not exactly so with the Shinto worship at Ise. Shinto religious pantheism is more easily understood. With the Holy Substance everywhere, Shinto is much like Catholicism. The religious situation includes secularism, as in the West, and missionaries are concerned with the entire situation. The Buddhist priest is concerned only with arousing the Buddhist spirit. The followers of Hitler and his demonic interpretation of the Highest Voice was demonic possession. Shintoists say they give an opportunity to primitive minds something which they can grasp. (Prof. Ariga: Both Buddists and Shintoists ignore morals and are thus deficient.) What is the Ultimate concern of Shintoism?

112

The Demonic Problem: Demonization of Religion

Irreligion is an impossibility because to fight against religion is still a religious concern. In Shintoism there is no real “Kami”, which makes for a demonization of “Kami”. L. G. 7/6/60

Part C: Informal Report on Lecture Trip to Japan – Summer 1960

Informal Report on Lecture Trip to Japan – Summer 1960 My report about our trip to Japan is meant to give interested friends an impression for our impressions, but not an “objective” study about past and present Japan. Nevertheless, it is my hope that my impressions have grasped and can communicate some reality. In any case, they had a great impact on me, both personally and philosophically. The limited purpose of the report also has the consequence that with respect to places, events, concrete situations, it is far from being complete; in short, it is not a diary. This refers especially to persons whom I would have liked to mention because they played an important part in the whole of my incredibly rich experience. But their names would mean little to the majority of those to whom the report will be sent. First, I must give information concerning external conditions of the trip. It was the result of an invitation from the Committee for Intellectual Interchange, which has committees in New York and Tokyo. The invitation came in the summer of 1959 and was readily accepted. The dates were determined by the end of my lectures at Harvard and the beginning of the university vacations in Japan: May 1st to June 30th. To this ten days of vacation in Japan were added, till July 10th. We flew by jet plane with stopovers in Los Angeles and Hawaii on the way to Japan, and with stopovers on the way back in Hawaii (three weeks) and San Francisco. The jet night-flights from Hawaii to Tokyo and back were a new experience, made even more interesting by the fact that because of the International Dateline, we lost the second of May on our way going and doubled the tenth of July returning. But above all, we experienced the effects of the “jet-age” on the life of this planet. When we arrived at Tokyo Airfield it was a first expression of Japanese hospitality that at this hour of six a.m. most members of the Committee were present to receive us, which meant for them getting up at four a.m. and earlier. Fortunately some of them speak a good English and could greet us and help us from this moment on to the last one at our departure. This leads me to a partly humorous, partly serious observation. We were reduced to the state of babies who can neither write nor read, nor speak nor travel alone (even with a taxi, if the driver has not received directions) nor eat alone in a Japanese house or restaurant (with innumerable unknown small dishes). One is completely dependent on a Japanese companion who does the speaking and reading. But there was always somebody, and we were helped with infinite and patience. The nine weeks were broadly divided into three weeks in Tokyo, three weeks

116

Informal Report on Lecture Trip to Japan – Summer 1960

in Kyoto, two and a half weeks again in Tokyo, and a half week in the mountain resort place, Karuizawa. But from both Tokyo and Kyoto, we went to other culturally or religiously important places like Kamakura, Nara, Nikko, Sendai, Ise shrine, etc. All this, like my whole working program, was carefully arranged by the Exchange Committee. They did a marvelous job, choosing out of innumerable possibilities those of essential importance, both for the Japanese audiences and for ourselves. They had to refuse many requests for lectures or discussions or interviews, and this was often not easy. But it saved my strength for the really important lectures and discussions, and gave me some time to prepare them carefully. This had to be done since I knew after the first few days that I could not use any of my American lectures without drastic changes. This was demanded by the Japanese cultural, religious and political situation and the Japanese audience were grateful for it. In Tokyo we stayed in the International House which is not a center for foreign students, as one would assume, but a meeting place for Japanese and foreign scholars, be it in conferences, be it in personal exchange. The house has excellent hotel accommodations, a beautiful garden with rocks, big trees, a pool, bridges and colorful flowers. The house itself is built in modern “Western” style. Because of the uncertainty of our coming, after my kidney stone attack in April, we were first put into the second story of a Japanese house on the same grounds which was used by an American staff member, Mr. Eugene Lengston, with whom we become friends. After Kyoto, we moved into the main house. A Japanese style house means, amongst other things, that whenever you enter, you must leave your shoes outside and use slippers – which are ready in great numbers. When you go out, a shoe horn helps you to slip again into your shoes. The procedure is bothersome but it keeps the houses clean, the floors polished and, above all, the cushioned straw mats of the inner rooms uninjured (in them not even slippers are allowed). It is astonishing how quickly one adapts oneself to such a form, especially if it is obviously justified, as is this one. The eyes also adapt themselves easily to the architectural forms of the Japanese houses with their simplicity, their sliding doors and windows and partly even walls, their wooden structure, their excellent proportions, and their almost complete lack of furniture. One enjoys each time the niche of every living room with a hanging scroll and a simple but refined flower arrangement, sometimes with only one flower, never with many, but always in three dimensions. I mentioned this in one of my lectures as an example of the Japanese ability to reduce things to their “essentials.” The whole stylistic development in Japan confirms this. It turns away from the more abundant Chinese forms which, as most other things, were imported about 1 500 years ago. In the International House we met Americans, Europeans, Japanese, Indians,

Informal Report on Lecture Trip to Japan – Summer 1960

117

etc., partly former, partly new acquaintances. But most important are the leaders and the staff of the house itself: Prof. Takagi, the chairman of the Interchange Committee who together with Mr. Matsumoto, the director of International House, determines the spirit of both the Committee and the House. They combine the best of the aristocratic Japanese tradition with a deep understanding of the main cultures of the West. Both have become our friends, a friendship which also includes Mrs. Matsumoto, “Hannako”. Both men play an important role in the public life of Japan, although they belong to the small group of nondenominational Christians, the so-called Non-Church movement. Politically, they are near to what we have called Religious Socialism, a religiously founded, democratic socialism. This, of course, has the effect that they are sharp critics of the ruling conservative party, the “Tories” as they are called. Of the many members of the staff who helped us in the difficulties of our “illiterate” existence in Japan, I want to mention my secretary, Mrs. Kako, with whom I worked every morning for at least half an hour and who was ready for every imaginable help during the whole day. We called her “Der Kako,” and soon felt quite familiar with her. Generally it was a surprising experience that the awareness of the racial difference disappeared after a short time. The personalities with whom we became acquainted lost their original strangeness and appeared to us only in their personal differentiation. This was true not only of friends, but also of larger groups and even of the people on the street. Personal differentiation on the basis of common humanity broke through the boundary lines of national and racial characteristics – not immediately but after a short time. It was much more difficult to penetrate behind the differences of tradition and culture; and it is probably impossible to overcome this gap completely. I felt the situation strongly and sometimes desperately in the preparation of my lectures and in the frequent discussion-meetings. At this point, I may say something about the language problem. The idea of learning even a limited waiter-Japanese was out of the question at my age. So every lecture and every discussion speech was translated, usually after I spoke about three minutes and then sat down to hear my thoughts expressed in ununderstandable sounds over which I had as little control as the text of my six books which have appeared in Japanese. A result of this procedure was that I had to develop the ideas of my lecture to the translator one hour before it started and that each lecture lasted from two to two and a half hours. For the Japanese students this was obviously not too much; they listened attentively, both to the English and the Japanese presentation. About twenty percent had some knowledge of English; but even they needed the Japanese confirmation. I shall not forget a scene in Kyoto University where some of them listened from

118

Informal Report on Lecture Trip to Japan – Summer 1960

outside the overcrowded room through the open windows for more than two hours, putting up umbrellas against the intermittent showers. Unfortunately I had little occasion to talk with students more intimately, partly because of my crowded schedule, partly because of the hesitation of the Japanese students to ask questions in the presence of their professors – a remnant of the authoritarian past (in this respect similar to German and just the opposite of American students). The lectures most requested centered around the problem of “religion and culture,” e. g., one lecture of this title and four lectures on “philosophy of religion” in Kyoto University, one lecture under the same title for Tokyo University and (in three parts) for television. Further, “Philosophy and Theology”, “The influence of Philosophy on my Thought”, twice “Principles of Religious Socialism”, two lectures on “The Spiritual Foundations of Democracy”, one on “Essentialism and Existentialism”. The lectures were delivered in about ten universities, amongst them Tokyo and Kyoto Universities. Everywhere a colleague was given to me as “interpreter” (the more expressive word for translator). The most frequently used was Professor Ariga in Kyoto, an active Christian and alternate delegate of the Central Committee of the World Council of Churches. We worked more and more as a well-trained team representing the “United Church of Christ in Japan.” Before every lecture we received a cup of green tea in the dean’s or president’s office. After this, there was frequently an elaborate Japanese dinner given by the president in a Japanese restaurant or club. We were invited to many of such dinners which go up to fourteen courses, each of them so small that one can eat most of them, at least partly. Many kinds of fish, including raw fish, and innumerable kinds of vegetables appear, served by kneeling girls in kimono and obi (the richly stuffed belt), both in bright or soft colors, tastefully combined. The guests sit on low pillows, legs under their bodies, a position to which one must be accustomed from early years on. Hannah was enabled to sit in this way because of her regular gymnastic exercises; I, or more exactly, my legs found changing methods of survival; sometimes we were given supporters for our back. The wooden sticks for grasping the food were beyond my skill so that I usually asked for a fork. With the dinner, “sake” is served, the Japanese rice-wine, which is warm and tastes very good. The serving girls take care that the little glasses are never empty, up to near the end when rice and green tea are given. The order of sitting is exactly regulated by age and social rank; it takes sometimes five minutes and more before the right person is found and is willing to take a “better” seat (nearer to the guest of honor), the host keeps in the background and directs the procedures. After the dinner the guest of honor gets up and the whole thing is finished. There are many other form of social intercourse which remind one of the

Informal Report on Lecture Trip to Japan – Summer 1960

119

feudal period not long ago, the repeated and deep bows, corresponding to our handshaking, the gracious politeness of all subordinates, the dependence on the family, the reverent attitude of woman to man, her exclusion from the social life of the man, the ceremonial character of festivals like weddings, of which we saw many in the International House (but only on astrologically favoured days), the dependence of students on teachers (in spite of revolutionary outbreaks), the custom of farewell gifts, even after a dinner invitation (a custom from which we benefited abundantly with beautiful small and large things, filling several boxes, amongst them art books, picture prints, reprints from old Buddhist sutratexts, fans, lacquer boxes, silver, pears, etc.) the traditional, very beautiful womens’ dresses, worn at parties or at home and still frequently on the streets (except in the central business districts), the ceremonial geisha parties of which we participated in one, the ritual dances and parades, some of which we saw. But all this is under continuous attack by and in an ultimately hopeless state of defense against the Western forms of life. With the progress of the spirit of industrial society and the democratization of life as such, the feudal remnants disappear, often under painful personal conflicts. This refers to the relation of the younger generation to the family ties and family traditions. A very intelligent, highly educated younger man asked me, “What can our traditions mean to us when we live a daily life which has no relation to them?” Another factor is the entrance of the woman into business life which dates only from the last war and has greatly helped to undercut the feeling of inequality which was completely natural to the Japanese woman and still is in many respects. Service is for them a source of happiness; and you can get service in Japan as abundantly and as pleasantly as you can get goods in America (but hardly service). A third element in the ending of the paternalistic traditions is the development of unionized labor and its successful fight in large scale enterprises. But this is only one section of the whole economy. When driving through the smaller main streets of the big cities, you see one small store beside another in endless rows, selling special types of goods, and you wonder, how can they live? They do live, and you can often look through the store into their private rooms where they sit on mats, and see them eating, playing, working. The store is a family enterprise nourishing the family spirit and with it the old traditions. Similar is the situation in the peasant groups which still make up the majority of the whole population. We saw several farms with the help of our friends, especially that of a village elder, a wonderful type of intelligent leadership under rural conditions. These two groups, supported by big business, produce the conservative majority which probably will rule Japan for an indefinite time, in spite of the justified criticism by the progressive forces against their undemocratic use of majority and their personal connection with the former war leaders.

120

Informal Report on Lecture Trip to Japan – Summer 1960

A Japanese friend said to me: We are a schizophrenic nation, split by the conflict of the old and the new. And when I told this to a high American representative, he asked me, “How long can this last without endangering the existence of the nation?” This is indeed the cardinal question which is also asked by many responsible Japanese. It is especially serious in relation to the younger generation which has lost the traditional norms of living and has not received new ones. This produces a vacuum into which questionable or dangerous forces may enter. An “ultimate concern”, an answer to the question of the meaning of life is lacking. Many are feeling it. Therefore, the more I emphasized this problem in my lectures, the stronger was the response. The fear of some of the older people that this may lead to a total moral disintregration seems to me exaggerated. There is still much inherited moral substance (largely created by centuries of Confucian education) in most individuals, certainly in the students which I saw in my lectures and on the campuses I visited. But, of course, this tradition is under continuous attack and is weakened step by step. The last remarks point to the political and religious realities I have encountered. There were abundant occasions to encounter both of them, the religious ones because I was introduced into many of them as a visiting theologian, the political ones because I was in Tokyo during the most critical three weeks of last June. First, my impressions of the political situation: They are the result of many talks with people, Japanese and foreigners, who were deeply involved in the events and their interpretation in the world press. I may sum up my ideas about the situation as follows: First, the demonstrations were neither anti-Western nor anti-American. Second, the demonstrations were organized by the Communist student groups under leadership of its most radical (often called “Trotskyite” majority). Third, the vast majority of the participants in the demonstrations were non-Communist students, often accompanied by their professors and workers under the leadership of the two Socialist parties. Fourth, the motive of these groups was a double one, the fear of becoming involved in a new war by security pact, and the hostility of the whole left against the undemocratic attitude of the Kishi government, especially the way it pushed through the pact. Fifth, the anti-American acts of violence were caused by the impression that Eisenhower, through his intended visit, had become a tool in the party politics of Kishi. These statements require some comment. One must first point out that there is an astonishing pro-American feeling in Japan. McArthur, the victor and commander of the occupation forces, is almost a Japanese hero. They don’t forget that he has liberated them from the hated Tojo government, a name which has a sound similar to that of Hitler in Germany, and they have not forgotten that he has given them a constitution which is democratic yet does not remove the symbolic function of the emperor. This basic feeling was in no way changed

Informal Report on Lecture Trip to Japan – Summer 1960

121

by the recent events, but there was some resentment (and in Americans even more than in Japanese) about the uninformed, over-simplified, American official interpretation, as well as newspaper versions giving the impression that there is only one cause for everything negative: communist propaganda. But propaganda can merely bring out what is already latently present. Great relief was felt by both Americans and Japanese when some Senators and some representatives of the State Department corrected the first misleading reports. The attitude of the vast majority of the Japanese people to communism is negative. Even the left-wing socialists are anti-communist. The radical student movement has been rejected by the communist party as too independent (although it was supported in the demonstrations). But there are some particular elements in the Japanese situation which we learned to understand. The first one is the relationship to China of 1500 years’ standing. China is called “the Continent”. It is the ultimate source of Japan’s culture and religion. Many important Japanese scholars study Chinese history in all cultural and religious aspects and contribute from the Asiatic side to the East-West encounter in Japan. The founders and saints of the great Buddhist sects are Chinese. China is the mother, she remained the mother in the Chinese-Japanese war and she has not ceased to be the mother in spite of her being conquered by communism. This emotional element should not be under-estimated. (Nothing similar is true in their attitude towards Russia.) With respect to the participation in the demonstrations, one could see that many students and others participated because of the emotional thrill they got out of it. But here also an additional factor cannot be made into the main factor without a distortion of the whole picture. Surprising for me and many others was the predominance of the students in the demonstrations. We were told that the students consider themselves as the future leaders of the nation much more confidently than they do in America. They will become the “mandarins” in the social hierarchy and they are sure of it. This is a totally un-Marxist feeling and dependent on the memory of the bureaucratic hierarchies, both in Japan and China. Some Japanese observers were very glad that the events awakened the students from their political indifference. Without a passionate support by at least some important groups the young Japanese democracy cannot develop. This explains also, at least partly, the participation of a large number of professors in the demonstrations, indirectly and directly. Many of them were moderately socialist and tried to exercise a moderating influence. Only a very few of them were communist. These points are illustrated by the fact that on the day of the most violent demonstrations my lecture on “Religion and Culture” in Tokyo University was overcroweded in a large lecture hall and the students listened attentively from 3:30 to 6:00 before some of them went to the

122

Informal Report on Lecture Trip to Japan – Summer 1960

demonstrations, while we with other professors were the dinner guests of the President of the University (who later came into trouble with the government through an anti-Kishi statement). About the feeling that the Kishi government has tricked the Diet by undemocratic methods into the acceptance of the security pact with the United States, I cannot say anything which is not public knowledge. But one cannot deny that during the critical weeks both sides used unparliamentary methods. More important is the feeling that the security pact will draw Japan into a war with the communist powers and the desire for peace is very strong in everybody. Therefore, the change of the American policy from disarming Japan (like Germany) to rearming it like Germany has produced some bitterness, especially because the status of disarmament was a part of the constitution given to Japan by McArthur. But beyond this the geographical situation of Japan, which makes it an outpost towards the Asiatic continent, awakens the desire of this ninety-million nation to change their function and to become politically independent. This is probably naïve in view of the present world, but it is emotionally understandable. All these considerations show that there was no hostility against Eisenhower even in the deeply regretted violence against Hagerty. He would have been greeted triumphantly if he had come from a moderately successful summit meeting and a friendly visit to Russia, as planned. Without this background – as highly responsible Japanese realized and immediately expressed – he ceased to be, as somebody said to me, a “messanger of peace” and had become a tool of reactionary and, as many still feel in Japan, militaristic party politics. The desire of the Japanese people to reach democratic maturity is, amongst others, expressed in the fact that Japan has not only one of the greatest number of regular newspaper readers but there are also magazines of high standing with a very large circulation. Two of these magazines gave me a dinner followed by two to three hours’ interview which, on the basis of a tape recording, was edited and published in the magazine. The questions were political and cultural. Some friends regretted that we came into the critical period and were afraid that something might happen to us. The latter was out of the question. It could have been possible for my lectures to have suffered under the disturbances, but even this was not the case; students as well as professors were more open to the ultimate problems to which the world historical and national problems pointed. And for me it was a first-rate introduction into the social and political situation of the Far East, and a new look at the world political situation generally. I referred earlier to the question of how Japanese people will solve the conflict between East and West, old and new, or more precisely, which concern will receive ultimate, i. e., religious, significance? It was the task of my lectures to point to an answer which had to find a way above indifference, as well as

Informal Report on Lecture Trip to Japan – Summer 1960

123

superstition, and which was not identical with one of the actual religions – not even Protestant Christianity. In connection with this task I was drawn into the religious realities of the Japanese life from the first to the last day. This was planned by the committee and developed far beyond their planning. I had a continuous contact with Christian and Buddhist groups of many different kinds and sporadic contact with Shintoists and the various forms of what is called “New Religions”. The contact was medicated by visits to temples, shrines, player halls and churches (I preached in Tokyo and Kyoto), and by organized and unorganized conversations with leading representatives of the different groups. The visit to temples and shrines in most cases had a character quite different from that of tourist’s. We were accompanied by one or more colleagues, sometimes art experts; we were received at the entrance, where one leaves the shoes, by a priest or the head of the temple or shrine; and before or after the visit we were invited to take with them the ceremonial tea. This is a very strong bitter beverage prepared from special tea leaves in an exactly defined process. Because of their age and beauty, the teacups are often worthy of being museum pieces. The cups contain about three and a half gulps, which is sufficient to revitalize you; a second cup is not good for the heart, as I found out. The tea is preceded by a sweet, which is much too sweet for our taste, and which is supposed to mix in the mouth with the bitterness of the tea. All this occurs while the participants are sitting on low pillows and are served by the host or younger members of the temple or shrine. If a conversation is intended, the host is asked a question by the guest of honor, and long, very illuminating discussions have developed in this form. An especially memorable discussion took place when the Zen Master, Hisamatsu, whom we knew from Harvard, showed us the famous seven-hundred year old rock garden connected with his temple. The garden, not larger than a large oblong courtyard, is surrounded by a wall with astonishing colors, produced by nature in about five hundred years. The floor is gravel, raked in an oceanic pattern, but most important are the about fifteen rocks, ordered in groups of two or three or more in perfect proportions of distance, height and breadth. Soon the chief-priest of the temple, Mr. Hisamatsu and I fell into a discussion of more than an hour about the question of whether the rock garden and the universe are identical (the position of the Buddhists) or non-identical but united by participation (my position). No amount of reading can replace such an experience. We also had a special relation with the main temple of the largest Buddhist denomination, called Jodo Shinshu (The True Sect of the Pure-land Church, Eastern Branch). It represents the opposite pole of the Zen denominations. While the latter teaches power of the individual to break through the state of unenlightenment to the state of enlightenment, the former teaches the complete surrender to

124

Informal Report on Lecture Trip to Japan – Summer 1960

the compassion of the Buddha Power, embodied in its Amida or Kannon figure. Calling his name brings salvation. The contrast between the two groups is also described at the difference between the “self-power” and the “other-power” faith. This is analogous to the contrast between Pelagius and Augustine and has profound consequences for religion as well as culture within Buddhism. The Amida type was a popular and lay reaction against the monastic and aristocratic character of Heian Buddhism. Its art is less abstract and its temples more colorful. The archbishop of a large section of Judo Shinshu is the father of a young Japanese who lived in our house in New York for a year when he studied at Columbia, Mr. Kosho Otani. As the eldest son, he is the heir of the archepiscopate and himself a priest. He arranged a long discussion (2–3 hours) in the university which comes under the archbishop, but is an acknowledged university of high standing. There we discussed, amongst others, the problem of the historical Gautama who was called the Buddha (as the historical Jesus was called the Christ). The problem is almost completely neglected in the vast Buddhist literature and it is only now that some scholars are raising such questions. The majority takes the traditional picture for granted and some groups, especially Zen, assert that the historical question does not matter religiously at all. We also had an elaborate Japanese dinner in their main temple. “Temple” designates a large complex of buildings, including the houses of the priests, several devotional places, a treasure house, one or two pagodas, gardens, etc. All this is surrounded by an elaborate fence and entered through immense gates of the highest architectural perfection. Kosho Otani’s mother is a sister of the Empress; she was my table neighbor, a middle-aged beautiful and noble lady, vivid and outgoing, although we could communicate only through the interpreter, Mr. Richard DeMartino (an old pupil of mine who acts as interpreter, of Suzuki and Hisamatsu in the United States and is now living in Japan in the complex of Hisamatsu’s temple). As interpreter, he attended most of my discussion with Buddhists. We had seen the archbishop himself performing memorial prayers for a large family group. At the table he was mostly quiet. We were given beautiful reprints of some original sutras (holy scriptures) which are fundamental for the denomination. Twice we met again for hours of discussion with a priest and a philosopher from the Otani group. The last day in Kyoto, where we intended to see an exhibition of old Buddhist paintings in a temple belonging to socalled Esoteric Buddhism, we were received by Kosho Otani and several others and invited by the chief priest to a Japanese luncheon. The discussion that followed centered around the doctrine of man and was very exciting. And then, after my official lecturing was finished and we were in the mountain resort, Karuizawa, they insisted on having another conversation there, although it took

Informal Report on Lecture Trip to Japan – Summer 1960

125

them a whole day by train from Kyoto. This four hour discussion (in an hotel with volcanic hot springs, in which we took a bath) was the last, very creative occasion of this kind for me in Japan. But there were other discussions, especially with Buddhist philosophers, particularly philosophers of religion. Here I must mention our friend, Professor Takeuchi from Kyoto University, who wrote an article in RELIGION AND CULTURE, the Festschrift for my seventieth birthday in which he contrasted my concept of “Being-itself” with his concept of “Absolute-Non-Being”. He was with us on many trips and temple visits, arranging things for us before we even expressed a wish, making photographs of not easily accessible paintings. He radiated something which I do not know whether to call Buddhist compassio or Christian agape. The other one was Professor Nishitani, a philosopher on Buddhist speculative background, but with a perfect knowledge of old and recent Western philosophy. His mind was incisive and logical. He presided at a meeting with about twenty Buddhist scholars where I was asked questions about various philosophical and theological problems, and I in turn had the opportunity of asking them questions about Buddhism as a living religion, about the idolatrous distortion of symbols in popular Buddhism, about past or present reformations in their history, about their interpretation of prayer. I have the feeling that Buddhism as a popular faith is an unsolved problem for most of them. I must mention a visit with Dr. Suzuki, whom I knew well from New York and Ascona, in one of the temples of Kamakura, where he has his house and a very rarelibrary, both of Buddhist and Western literature. In spite of his ninetytwo years, he was still able to have a long talk and an equally long and excellent Japanese dinner with us. In one of the discussions with a Pure-land-Buddhist scholar, the question of the possibility of communion between persons came up and he made the statement: “If the individual self is a ‘substance’ (in the sense of ‘standing upon itself’), no community is possible; to which I replied that “only on this basis is community – in contrast to realizing identity – possible.” The discussions with Buddhists have shown to me that the main points of difference are always: The different valuation of the individual person, of religious and social reformation, of the meaning of history, of interpersonal relations, of finitude and guilt. It is the contrast between the principle of identity and the principles of participation. It seems to me that, although the principles are exclusive, the actual life of both Christianity, especially in its Protestant form, and Buddhism, especially in its monastic form, could receive elements from each other without losing their basic character. This leads to the question of Japanese Christianity. According to both obser-

126

Informal Report on Lecture Trip to Japan – Summer 1960

vations and conversations it is a complex and serious problem. Quantitatively speaking, Christianity is very weak: Less than these statistics indicate. Its impact is mediated by outstanding individuals, by teachers in Christian schools, by professors in Christian universities (where only twenty percent or less of the students are members of a Christian church, but all are some how under the influence of the spirit of the school), by the continous exchange with people who come from a Christian culture, by the elements of Christian tradition which are imported with the general westernization of the Japanese life. There are three Protestant groups in Japan, the largest one the United Church of Christ; second, the Lutherans and Episcopalians who became independent after belonging to it during the war; third, the Non-Church Christians who are a small group critical of all organized churches, meeting regularly for devotional purposes in private houses. With the Japanese Catholics – smaller in number than the Protestants – I had no contact. It is an extraordinary feeling when one is in a pagan country for the first time and preaches in a small Christian church to a small group of Christians. One feels nearer to early Christianity, and the question of missions becomes existential. All churches in such a situation have been founded in their recent past by missionaries and are mission churches by their very existence. This is different from the West where active Christianity is surrounded by large masses of people who within a Christian culture are indifferent or hostile to the churches. Even they are Christian in their substance, and their cultural forms are kinds of Christian, not pagan, humanism. This is different in Japan where the Christian substance is lacking, whether the people follow one of the traditional religions or have become indifferent to any actual religion – as is the case with large masses of the Japanese. This produces problems of a very difficult character. In the discussions with groups of ministers and missionaries the situation appeared to be like this: First, I learned that the term “missionary” does not mean what the first connotation of the word is: people who try to convert pagans to Christianity by a direct preaching approach. They use the indirect ways to which I have referred and wait for those who come to them. Only very few exceptions to this method seem to exist. Second, it is not the active pagan religions, Buddhism, Shintoism, and the New Religions which are the main object of the missionary task but the masses of indifferent towards any religion. Therefore, as I said in one of my lectures, Christianity should not present itself as another religion, but as what it truly is, namely a message over against all religions including Christianity. In this respect the problem of Christianity in East and West is equal. This leads thirdly to the question on what theological basis is such kind of preaching possible? The predominant theology in Tokyo is “Barthian” (not Barth’s), which

Informal Report on Lecture Trip to Japan – Summer 1960

127

corresponds with the fact that the predominant philosophy is analytic philosophy. In Kyoto, metaphysics in philosophy and a moderate liberalism in theology prevail. Important for the situation in Japan are the two questions, whether a theology is able to give foundation to the distinction between the “Christian event” and the religious reception of it in the Christian religion; and whether a theology is able to express the Christian event in concepts which can be received by a highly civilized nation in its own language. The last question leads to the fourth problem of Christianity in Japan, the problem of communication. There are fundamentalist groups who consider the language of the two Testaments as the unique and exclusive language of revelation and try to impose it on the Japanese people. The majority, however, realize that the Christian churches have used a language which was understandable to the people amongst which they lived. So they ask, what language is understandable to the Japanese? If this is asked seriously, a fifth problem arises: Is there one language only or are there at least two, the language of the highly educated, often influenced by Buddhist elements, and the language of the masses who live on the level of a primitive Shintoism or a magically distorted Buddhism? And is there not a third level, that of Confucian ethical traditions, and a fourth, that of Western skeptical indifference? These levels do exist and the churches should be able to speak in the language of each of them. But in order to do so they must liberate themselves from the predominance of the language (the word language standing for any kind of expression) in which Christianity was given to the missionaries, that is, American Methodism or continental Lutheranism. If they cannot transcend their denominational heritage in the power of their Christianity, one cannot see how they will reach the heart of the Japanese people. It seems to me that quite a few Japanese Christian theologians realize this situation, among them my friend and translator, Ariga, and my former pupil, Mrs. Chow, who is now professor at the International Christian University in Tokyo. But the way is full of impediments and demands a total rethinking of the role of Christianity in the Asiatic world. I referred several times to Shintoism, and would like to tell of my encounters with it. We have visited the two main shrines, the Meiji shrine in Tokyo and the Ise shrine in the south. The latter is the most sacred, the former the most important politically. Both times we were guided by priests of the shrine. In Tokyo it was quite of a solemn occasion. We were brought to the water of purification and entered the inner section of the shrine, saw a colorful wedding, but could not see the innermost part which contains the sacred mirror, and is reserved for the emperor. Then we were led to a teahouse in a separated garden, had ceremonial tea and a long discussion about the relation of the Shinto-gods kamis to the universe which they represent and about the way the Shinto believer

128

Informal Report on Lecture Trip to Japan – Summer 1960

can take to salvation. In the course of the discussion the High Priest admitted that the problems of sin and guilt were strange to this thought. The religious function of Shinto pantheism (here this word can be used, but not in respect to Buddhism) seems to me a double one: to maintain the memory of and reverence for the past generations in family and nation. In the Meiji shrine the “spirit” of the emperor Meiji is “present” (the emperor who brought about one of the most important changes in Japanese history in the second half of the 19th century). The word “spirit” in this context means not immortal soul, although in the act of devotion this is often imagined. It means not the Platonic essence of a being, although this is a possible philosophical interpretation. It is perhaps nearest to the Roman manes (e. g. of the emperors who also received sacrifices). When the Eisenhower visit was planned the question arose whether he should see the Meiji shrine. The Christian churches and some Buddhist groups were against it because they were afraid that it would strengthen not only Shintoism as such but also the connection between state and church – a tie which has been radically cut by McArthur and the constitution he gave. In the discussion about this point the Shinto representatives pointed to something like the distinction between veneration and adoration which is used in the Greek Catholic Church in order to justify the role of the icons in the cult. The Shinto priests went even beyond this and promised that it would be mere sightseeing visit without any religious connotations. This episode illuminates the original unity between the religious and the national in Shintoism. The emperor traces his ancestors from the sun-goddess, who herself is a manifestation of the Universe. The other side of the Shinto-influence is the relation of all classes of the Japanese people to nature. When we visited the Ise shrine, the most impressive part of it were the tremendous cedar and kryptomerria trees, the loss of some of them in the last typhoon saddened everybody deeply. The teahouse garden of the Meiji shrine has in season the most beautiful water lilies and iris. One Sunday morning we visited it privately and admired not only the incredible taste of the arrangement, but also the pilgrim-like devotional attitude of the masses of exclusively Japanese people who walked slowly along the flowerbeds. On the desk for one of my first speeches was a crooked pine tree of half my height in a large flowerpot – the way they appear in Japanese paintings and I could not refrain from mentioning it at one point of my speech. Paintings of cranes and phoenixes appear in palaces and temples. And the gardens and flower arrangements (the latter thaught in special courses) permeate the life of almost everybody. In all this is Shinto influence. It is lived pantheism. But its religious power is limited. Therefore, Buddhism had a comparatively easy entrance from China and Korea into Japan since the fifth century after Christ. And as it took on Chinese characteristic in China, so it took on Japanese characteristic in Japan.

Informal Report on Lecture Trip to Japan – Summer 1960

129

Shinto elements can be found in Japanese Buddhism. In Nikko there is even a Buddhist temple as a part of a Shinto shrine. But Buddhism brought something that Shintoism lacked: An answer to the problem of suffering and death. The whole situation is nicely symbolized in the fact that most Japanese are Buddhist as well as Shintoist, and that they go to the shrine for the wedding ceremony and to the Buddhist priest for the funeral. The comparative stagnation of Buddhism and Shintoism, especially in lower classes, has given rise to a large group of so-called New Religions. They have partly Buddhist, partly Shintoist background and are all more or less syncretistic (uniting elements from different religions and religious levels). Their strong appeal to the masses has several reasons: the most external one is the fact that the new constitution has guaranteed religious freedom and that this was used by qualified and unqualified, religious and pseudo-religions men to gather groups around them with the claim of having received a new revelation. For, herein lies the second reason: the desire for an immediate divine manifestation which as such has unquestioned authority. In no case, I saw, was it the content of the revelation which was impressive; it was not new at all. But it was the way in which it was communicated. In Tendri, the largest group I saw (which existed before the new constitution, concealed as a Shinto sect) it is the revelatory experience of simple peasant woman whose words have now canonic validity for three million enthusiastic followers. We visited their self-built city and temple, and were invited by the archbishop to a splendid dinner. It is astonishing what an amount of sacrifices the authorities of this group can impose on the members day and night, sacrifices in terms of money, pilgrimages and voluntary service, even of the lowest character. One of the results is that the sect is very rich and possesses large buildings, schools, a university, and a museum and a library both full of real treasures in art and manuscripts. The cult has Shinto elements, magic dances and veneration of the founder expressed by bringing daily food to her spirit. Another type of “new Religions“ we encountered, basically Buddhist, was in Tokyo. It also has a large membership of people who are ready for every sacrifice. So they are building one pink house after the other (pink is their chosen color). Their new temple will become one of the largest buildings in Tokyo with a cupola which seems to surpass even St. Peter’s in Rome. But most interesting is the method of counseling which they do in large halls where fifteen to twenty people, poor women by far the majority, sit around in a circle, asking about their personal problems and receiving answers by the leader, usually a woman. Hundreds crowd each of the several halls and many thousands are served in this way every day. It is a kind of group counseling to people who have nobody to whom to go with their troubles. This perhaps is the most important key to the rapid growth of these sects (comparable to the new sects in the United

130

Informal Report on Lecture Trip to Japan – Summer 1960

States) – that the atomized individual finds a community in which his needs are taken seriously. The founder, a man of fifty to sixty years of age, formerly a milk-delivery man, had his inspiration about thirty years ago. He guided us through his “realm” everywhere greeted reverently, and gave us the usual tea and gift. In view of these “New Religions” Christianity as well as Buddhism must ask themselves serious questions, just as they must in view of the vast amount of religious indifference. As a theologian, I asked myself the question: what function does theology have in view of these successful eruptions of primitive religion in East and West? In giving my impressions about the political and the religious spheres I pointed frequently to artistic observations. I now want to speak directly about the visual arts in Japan. The first impressions one gets come naturally from the Japanese architecture – house, palace, temple or shrine. A first thing one realizes is that in all these cases, wood is the only building material. The consequence is that there are very few buildings which are old with respect to the material. But there are many which are very old – from the 7th century on – with respect to their form. They are rebuilt after each fire in exactly the same way in which they were built the first time. Therefore, they show the style of the time in which they were conceived. Sometimes they are intentionally razed and rebuilt every twenty years, as for instance, the Ise shrine. Here alongside the actual building is an empty lot where the former shrine stood and the next will stand. The official idea behind it is that the holy shall not disintegrate. Another general rule is that most Japanese buildings have only one story. This makes them more adequate to the human measure and at the same time it allows an intimate connection with nature. The house is oriented towards the garden, however small the garden may be; and the garden reaches into the house through the movable walls, and through flowers, placed at least into the niche. Finally, the emptiness of the Japanese house, the lack of furniture (no chairs, very low tables, no beds, only mats and blankets, no drawers, only cupboards) makes it flexible, reminding one of a tent. The first weeks when we lived in a half-Japanese house and had to rearrange the walls and windows every night and every morning, I sometimes felt as though I were sleeping in a tent, especially when rain and wind had to be kept outside. About the architecture of the temples, I cannot say much beyond what is known generally and what I have already indicated. One cannot admire enough the carpenter’s art which has built these often large and high temples, pagodas and palaces without ever using a nail. The idea of perfection in the smallest parts of a work, which one can observe everywhere in Japan is effective in these buildings. This ideal is also manifest in the Imperial palaces and villas. One of

Informal Report on Lecture Trip to Japan – Summer 1960

131

them, Katsura, has such perfect proportions that the famous modern architect, Walter Gropius, returned again and again to it during the months of his stay in Japan. If we contrast genuine Japanese buildings with those of India, the Arabian countries, the ancient and modern West, one must say that they are comparatively small. But in their smallness they show a rare perfection. The Buddhist temples are full of great works of sculpture, predominantly of the Buddha, his Trinity, (Buddha himself and his Powers of Mercy and Wisdom), the Bodisatvas, the half-demonic Guardians of the Holy, figures of great teachers and saints. The largest figures of the Buddha (in bronze) are in Nara (one of the earliest capitals) and Kamakura (a later capital, before Kyoto). The one in Kamakura stands out in the landscape, without a roof, overwhelming in its dimensions and its beauty. We saw it a few days after our arrival and I felt that I now would live for two months in his shadow – though more in cultural than in an immediately religious respect. There are sculptures of the Buddha in many style and expressions of his meaning. But this is an infinite study and cannot be discussed here. I only want to confess that we almost always were impressed by the holiness radiating from these sculptures. They are not representing a god or gods, but they represent the Buddha-power, the Spirit of awaking and opening the eyes of the mind for truth about oneself and one’s world and about that which is above both of them and which is present in the Buddha Spirit. About the great paintings of the past I can make only a few personal remarks. We were guests of the director and founder of the famous museum for folkarts who first showed us the beautiful pieces of crafts from Korea, China and Japan, then after a ceremonial tea had a discussion with me about the influence of religion on the artistic style. He showed us several scrolls, influenced by Zen Buddhism, the religion of “self-power” and other scrolls, influenced by Shin Buddhism, the religion of “other-power”, and the comparison was very illuminating. Later on we would discern for ourselves examples of both styles: The Zen style has a strong tendency towards concentration or, as I could call it by a term of Schelling: “essentialization”. Under a famous painting of this style, “The Four Persimmons” (a simple fruit) we had a fully developed Zen tea ceremony. The fruits are painted in such a way that each of them represents “being-itself” which for Buddhism is “non-being”; they are something, but their being is transcended towards absolute nothingness – beyond subject and object. Therefore, the preferred coloring on such paintings are many shades of black and white in which color, so to speak, is negated. In contrast to this the Shin type of Buddhism, the Amida religion of divine mercy reaching down to the suffering world has produced a more colorful art, less reduced, less sharpedged, more rounded and centered in the mandala way. It is not surprising that Confucianism with its exclusive emphasis on social and political ethic has contributed little to

132

Informal Report on Lecture Trip to Japan – Summer 1960

the visual arts. Without the invention of the Far East by Mahazana Buddhism the great art of China and Japan would not exist. In ceremonial acts religious and aesthetic elements are mixed. We attended two tea ceremonies, the series of acts in which the tea-master prepared the ceremonial tea. Ordinarily these acts are omitted, as in all the cases mentioned before. Formerly the participants had to creep through a low door, in this way humbling themselves before the holy. (Even the samurais [the knights] had to do this, leaving their swords outside). The preparation for the tea ceremony is done in the presence of those assembled and it is a long series of manipulations with the water, tea, cups and the tools necessary for the preparation of the perfect tea. It produces a mood of mutual belongingness and the experience of perfection amongst the participants and may be accompanied by serious or gay conversations. We also saw a ceremony in a restaurant for about a hundred people, which we felt to be a desperation; unfortunately, this is the type which is destined for export, and even more unfortunately, such export was defended by some high ranking Zen people with the argument which is so important for their own problems: that the good, even in distortion, has some illuminating power. They do not acknowledge demonized symbols. “Buddhism is not demonized”, I was told. In the Ise Shrine (Shinto) we saw ceremonial dances, one publicly done by girls, one especially performed for us by about twelve men that was an immensely impressive movement of hands and feet danced to a divine-demonic music (they made a record of it for us). Before the public dance a religious ceremony with a cup of sake was given to every participant; we had a special meeting with the priests after the two dances in which we received some of their sacramental food as a gift. Hannah saw a procession with old costumes as they are commonly used at the many local festivals, most of which we missed. Instead we attended three forms of classical Japanese theater (the fourth is still reserved for the emperor and invited guests). The oldest and most ceremonial form is the “No” play. We attended a performance – it takes about six hours. Only men actors are used, even if they play female roles. They enter in beautiful ancient-style dresses, the main actors also wearing masks which are works of art. (We bought one). They speak in a specially trained voice, accompanied by a music which has a limited tone scale and in which the rhythm-creating drum is quite important. The plots are based on old legendary and mythological stories. It was the theater of the court and the nobility; they often performed the No play themselves. The second oldest form is the puppet theater, which was open for the people. There is something extraordinary in the way it is done. Every puppet is served on the open stage by three people, the main actor whose face is free, and two attendants who are veiled in black. The former moves head, upper

Informal Report on Lecture Trip to Japan – Summer 1960

133

body and right hand, and particularly the fingers, eyelids, lips of the puppet, the two others the left hand and the legs. Ten years’ training is necessary to do this to perfection. But the most important part is done by the speaker who, sitting with the musicians and accompanied by music, incorporates in voice and expression, every role and every mood. We were invited behind the curtain and shown the inner mechanism of the puppet and the way they are moved. The third form, the Kabuki is the latest and has become the most popular. In attending one we spent almost six hours (with intermission for dinner). Since it has now been shown in America, I don’t need to say much about it. It is more dramatic, more naturalistic, less stylized than No; but it did not impress us as deeply as the latter. All this is great past, reaching into the present, but no longer actual for the present. The young Japanese feel estranged from it and are looking for new ways. But they try to keep something of their tradition. This became especially clear to us in painting. We say several exhibitions of modern Japanese art; we even bought some wood block prints. There is a tremendous struggle going on to depart from the old traditions without becoming imitators of the modern styles of the West in all its different phases. Only rarely does one find somebody who has solved that problem to a certain degree; and this, of course, is symbolic for the whole situation in Japan and large sections of Asia. And now let me say a few words about the landscape out of which all this grows. It reminds one more of Europe than of America. The large monotonous plains of America are lacking. Nature is very varied and man has put to use every piece of land for himself. Only endless rice fields can become monotonous, although each of them is very small and personally cultivated. We had the rare luck to see the Mount Fuji twice for quite a time. All the postcards of the world are not able to destroy the impression of divine greatness it gives. But also Mount Ashama, a smoking volcano under which we lived for five days in Karuizawa, has the classical form of a volcano. The smaller mountains and hills reminded us of southern Germany. For the first time we saw the cultivation of rice fields. They are the greatest part of the year under artfully irrigated water, in which the farmers work either barefoot or with high boots. We also saw tea and mulberry plants. By boat we visited two beautiful bays with many islands where “cultured” pearls and oysters are cultivated. The ocean is everywhere near. Much has been said about the major cities, especially the two in which we lived, Tokyo and Kyoto. Kyoto, Nara and one other city were saved from bombing through the advice of an American committee of art experts. The Japanese speak gratefully about this fact which has become almost legendary. The large-scale destruction of Tokyo, the rapid and unplanned rebuilding and the immense

134

Informal Report on Lecture Trip to Japan – Summer 1960

growth of the world’s largest city (nine million if the farthest suburbs are taken into account) have given to Tokyo the character of a city with many centers. Each of these centers has a big railway station, around it are business and amusement streets, and between the centers are the residential quarters. There is however one universal center, near the large, water surrounded island which is the Imperial Palace (invisible in a vast park and closed to the public). Beautiful is the view of the narrow streets with shops, restaurants, bars, teahouses, etc., all of them in the evening have colorful neon-light advertisements written in the picture-like Japanese letters. The traffic is immense, the masses of human beings are overwhelming and sometimes frightening. Yoshivara, the so-called red-light district, is abolished; its streets with bars and night clubs still show their former function. Prostitution is forbidden, but of course, not suppressed, (some critics, amongst them people of highest moral standing, believe that the situation has become worse). All this must be distinguished from the institution of geishas, who are social entertainers, for individuals or groups, well-organized according to a kind of hierarchy and local distinctions, very expensive, often unattainable, maintaining a dying tradition, in which beauty and tragedy were mixed. (This was the information we received from the friends who organized and shared our own geisha party). After three weeks in Tokyo we went in a most beautiful six hour train trip to Kyoto. Whoever speaks about Kyoto becomes enthusiastic, and rightly so. With respect to landscape and art treasures, it can be compared with Florence. And equally to Old Florence, it is a center of an intellectual life which is concentrated in the Kyoto and the other universities – Doshisha, Otani, etc. We stayed for three weeks in Kyoto in the beautifully situated Mizako Hotel which overlooks valley and city and gives a large view upon the surrounding mountains. The three weeks in Kyoto were the most intensive time of my stay in Japan, and one of the most intensive time of my life. This was true with respect to work, to “sightseeing” (including two days for Nara, two days for the Ise Shrine), and to continuous conversations with people. The charm of this ancient capital with its innumerable temples and several palaces and Imperial villas is great and things to discover are inexhaustible. But here the distinction between reading and seeing becomes decisive, and so I shall stop. For a long time I was undecided whether the trip to Japan was justified, especially at my age and with the heavy obligations to my other work. Any doubt in this respect has been removed by the actual experience. I cannot formulate what it has meant before all the impressions have settled down in me; and even then probably others will notice the influence of Japan more than I myself. But I know that something has happened: No western provincialism of which I am aware will be tolerated by me from now on in my thought and work, and I am

Informal Report on Lecture Trip to Japan – Summer 1960

135

grateful to the Japanese friends who worked for a long time to make my trip and this insight possible. I can tell them that I have learned to love Japan and her people. Paul Tillich

Part D: Preface to Professor Tillich’s Collected Lectures

Preface It was a Christmas gift received quite unexpectedly two days before Christmas Eve, when a letter arrived from Professor Takagi, telling me about the near completion of the book of the addresses I gave in Japan in the spring of 1960. This preface which he asked me to write can be only an expression of my gratitude for the difficult work of editing, organizing and translating my lectures, which in many cases I gave from prepared notes and not from a completed manuscript. But I am most grateful for the fact that the idea of such a book has arisen at all in the minds of my friends and collections in Japan. It shows me that they share the feeling I have expressed in the “Informal Report” (which they wanted to have added to my lectures) that we achieved a real dialogue and a genuine interchange of ideas during those unforgettable ten weeks. It is my hope that this book will continue that dialogue with both the Christian and the Buddhist sectors of the Japanese religions and cultural life, and with respect not only to the spiritual but also to the political problem of East and West. It was a matter of great satisfaction to me when I read, a few days ago, that the World Council of Churches in its New Delhi Assembly has emphasized as a tool for the world religions. I would like this book to be considered as a tool for the dialogue between Christianity and at least one of the great Asiatic religions and cultures. The ultimets [sic!] outcome of such a continuing conversation cannot be foreseen, but certainly it can contribute to clarification, understanding and the creation of a community – however small – of friendship and love between those who participate in the dialogue. This was my great and inspiring experience in Japan and because of it I am glad and grateful that this book has appeared. Paul Tillich Between Christmas and the New Year, December 1961 Cambridge, Massachusetts

Part E: Letters

Letters (1) Tetsutaro Ariga to Paul Tillich, Kyoto, 31. December 1958 Faculty of Letters Kyoto University Kyoto, Japan December 31, 1958 Professor Paul Tillich Harvard Divinity School Cambridge, Mass., U. S. A. Dear Professor Tillich: My friend and former colleague Professor Hinichi Hisamatsu has told us at Kyoto University that you are interested in visiting Japan in the not distant future. There is not the least doubt that your visit, if materialized, will prove to be an occasion of great significance for the clarification of the problems of East and West, Buddhism and Christianity, and the like. For your books are being widely read and studied in this country not only by Christian theologians but also by Buddhists, Shintoists, and philosophers. In default of financial prospective on our part we are not yet ready to extend our formal invitation to you. However, I together with my colleagues may be able to do something toward making your coming possible. Therefore please indicate to me: When you will be able to come and stay in Japan: in which year and during which months of the year. What would be the minimum proportion of your total expenses for which we at this end should be responsible. If your entire expenses should be covered form the resources, whatever these may be, available on our part, kindly make the point explicit. (Of course we understand Mrs. Tillich with you.) On what themes you will prefer to lecture while in Japan. An early reply from you would be most appreciated. Wishing you a most happy New Year, Your sincerely, Tetsutaro Ariga

144

Letters

(2) Douglas Horton to Paul Tillich, New York, 5. January 1959 January 5, 1959 Dear Professor Tillich: It is a delight to have your greetings at the turn of the year. I am especially happy to have a sample of your own calligraphy. That brings you close. Thank you no end for the labor you have put into securing the Zen books us. We shall await the microfilming and photostating, and welcom the products when they come. As for Professor Tillich, I am afraid that it will be difficult to secure him for the fall semester of 1959 for the simple reason that he is taking a sabbatical leav leave for the spring semester of this same year. If I were you I should write Dr. Tillich direct, telling him exaxtly what your preference would be and intimating that you and I have been in touch with each other and that you know that the Divinity School will be happy to cooperate, in any way that it can, in the plans which you develop. With the best of good wishes, I am Ever faithfully yours, Douglas Horton His secretary tells me that you are already in touch with him. Good. Do not hesitate to explain your preferences to him.

Letters

145

(3) Paul Tillich to Tetsutaro Ariga, New York, 15. January 1959 The Federated Theological Schools The University of Chicago Chicago 37, Illinois January 15, 1959 Professor Tetsutaro Ariga Faculty of Letters Kyoto University Kyoto, Japan Dear Professor Ariga: I have just received here in Chicago where I am lecturing during January your very exciting letter of December 31 st and also a similar letter from Professor Takeuchi. Let me first express my gratefulness for your intention to invite me to Japan and my strong inclination to accept if it is possible. But I cannot answer your technical questions before I have returned to Harvard and have talked the situation over with Mrs. Tillich and my colleagues. It may be the end of February before you can have a more definite answer. In any case, the earliest term would be May, 1960. A few days ago I received a strong encouragement to go to Japan from my former assistant and friend Walter Leibbrecht, and yesterday Professor Eliade spoke with great enthusiasm about Kyoto and mentioned you especially. He also urged me to go whenever I can make it. I believe it is in the spirit of both men if I send you their greetings. Very sincerely yours, Paul Tillich

146

Letters

(4) Tetsutaro Ariga to Paul Tillich, Kyoto, 23. January 1959 Faculty of Letters Kyoto University Kyoto, Japan January 23, 1959 Professor Paul Tillich Federated Theological Faculty The University of Chicago Chicago, Ill., U. S. A. Dear Professor Tillich: Thank you very much for your kind reply. Of course we would be waiting till you talk the matter over with your wife and colleagues. In the meantime, however, let me provide you with this information that it seems to be quite possible that your visit to Japan will be sponsored by the Intellectual Interchange project which has its committees on both sides of the Pacific. Father Ford of Corpus Christi Church, Rev. McCracken of Riverside Church, Mrs. Roosevelt are among those who have been sent to this country by the project. I understand it has enough budget to provide first-class airplane fare both ways and pay for your expenses of inland trips and hotels. Its committees will certainly know how to arrange things for such distinguished visitors as you and your wife so that both the American and the Japanese side may be benefited. As soon as I learn your intention I shall contact the Tokyo committee of the project. Your sincerely, Tetsutaro Ariga

Letters

147

(5) Paul Tillich to Tetsutaro Ariga, Massachusetts, 24. March 1959 Harvard Divinity School 45 Francis Avenue Cambridge 38, Massachusetts March 24, 1959 Professor Tetsutaro Ariga Faculty of Letters Kyoto University Kyoto, Japan Dear Professor Ariga: Thank you for your prompt answer to my first reply. In the meantime, I have thought over and discussed the whole problem with many people. There also came a letter from Mr. DeMartino urging me to come. I am basically willing to do it, but there are two problems which have arisen again and again in these talks. The first is the problem of passage. Would it be possible that the foundation which provides the money to pay for both Mrs. Tillich and myself? I actually wouldn’t be able to come alone, and my doctor would not permit me. The other question is the amount of work that would be expected of me, especially the individual conversations with students and colleagues. Since I shall be almost 74 years of age when I would come in May 1960, I have to restrict myself in this respect. Can a limitation of such interviews be guaranteed? With respect to the content of my official lectures, I am ready for every section of systematic theology, for philosophy of religion, and for philosophy and theology of culture in its different aspects. I would like that you and your colleagues choose what you think is most adequate to the situation in Kyoto. Cordially yours Paul Tillich

148

Letters

(6) Tetsutaro Ariga to Harry J. Carman, Tokyo, 22. May 1959 May 22, 1959 Mr. Harry J. Carman 221 M Butler Library Columbia University New York 27, N. Y. Dear Harry: Shortly after my previous letter to you requesting you to explore the possibility about Dr. Robert Oppenheimer, a letter from Professor Tetsutaro Ariga of Kyoto University reached us about a month ago, expressing the earnest wishes of a committee of specialists in the fields of philosophy and religion formed especially for the purpose of inviting Professor Paul Tillich to Japan that he be invited as a guest master on the Intellectual Interchange program. The formation of such a committee seems to indicate that a very warm reception and sincere response is guaranteed for Dr. and Mrs. Tillich if they should be able to come. Professor Ariga has also indicated that Professor Tillich had replied to his preliminary informal inquiry that after May 1960 he and Mrs. Tillich would be able to come to Japan. Today Professor Yoshinori Takeuchi came up from Kyoto to see Shige about the matter. Shige and I had deferred writing to you about the above mentioned proposal from the philosophers group, partly because we thought we might be able to hear from you something of Dr. Oppenheimer’s availability. After our conversation with Professor Takeuchi, however, I am hastening to inform you that, assuming the possibility of materializing our plan of inviting Dr. Oppenheimer, we feel that it would be a very fine arrangement if our Committee will decide to invite Professor Tillich on its program, and make the best use of the two month (or even a month and half period of his visit to Japan in cooperation with Professor Ariga’s committee. The immediate and practical question, of course, is whether we still have fund adequate for the necessary expenses of inviting both Dr. Oppenheimer and Dr. Tillich and their wives. Personally Shige and I feel that the idea of concluding our program with such outstanding guest visitors is excellent, and we are inclined to feel that you would agree with us, since their names appeared in the first list of desirable guests which our two committee prepared at the initial stage. We should be greatly if you would kindly write back to us about the financial situation and your thought about our proposed invitation to Professor Tillich at your early convenience. We should be doubly grateful if you could let us have any intermediary news about Dr. Oppenheimer also.

Letters

149

With warmest personal regards, Sincerely yours, Yasaka Takagi cc. to Mr. Douglas W. Overton

150

Letters

(7) Tetsutaro Ariga to Paul Tillich, Kyoto, 2. June 1959 Faculty of Letters Kyoto University Kyoto, Japan June 2, 1959 Professor Paul Tillich Harvard Divinity School Cambridge, Mass., U. S. A. Dear Professor Tillich: Since I received your kind letter of March 24, I have not been able to write you because no word has come to me from the Intellectual Interchange Committee and has learned that the committee will soon meet and that it is quite likely that an invitation will be extended to you. So on my part, I am sure your visit to Japan will be sponsored by the said committee, which will provide first-class airplane fare both ways and pay for other expenses – both for you and Mrs. Tillich. This, however, I am writing in anticipation of the committee’s formal action. I hope you will gear from the committee itself in the nearest future. Back in the middle of April I sent a formal letter of request to the Intellectual Interchange Committee, in be behalf of a group of scholars interested in inviting you to this country. Copies of your letters to me accompanied the letter so that I am sure the committee will understand on what conditions you would accept its invitation. With warmest greetings, Yours sincerely Tetsutaro Ariga

Letters

151

(8) Yoshinori Takeuchi to Paul Tillich, Kyoto, 24. Juli 1959 Faculty of Letters Kyoto University Kyoto, Japan 33, Jodoji-shinnyocho Sakyo, Kyoto, Japan July 24, 1959 Professor Paul Tillich Harvard Divinity School 45 Francis Avenue Cambridge 38, Massachusetts U. S. A. Dear Professor Paul Tillich: Recently I received the letter from Mr. Yasaka Takagi, the Director of Japan Committee for Intellectual Interchange, informing that the Committee had decided to invite you and your wife for two months in Japan next year. Perhaps, the letter of invitation has been sent to you, by this time, and this is only my private information about that. When I went to Tokyo on 22 May to promote the plan further and to consult with Mr. Y. Takagi and Mr. Shigeharu Matsumoto, the Managing Director of the Committee for your invitation, they both showed me the earnest desire for our program. They were solicitous for your health and said to me that your days in Japan should be spent in health, leisure and comfort, so that you might return to America with good impression with Japan. Your obligation in Japan will be by no means a heavy one. Surely your wishes, which you have expressed to Prof. Ariga, will be satisfactorily fulfilled. Perhaps you have been, or will soon be, notified of the details of your terms by the letter from the Committee. I hope ardently that you will accept this invitation, if you are in good health. Please tell me your wishes, if you have any, or if there is any doubtful point about this matter, please do not hesitate to ask me. Prof. Ariga started for Germany to attend on the Congress of the Church of the World held at München, and will be absent by the end of September. Please kindly remember me to Mrs. Tillich. Sincerely yours, Yoshinori Takeuchi

152

Letters

(9) Yasaka Takagi to Paul Tillich, Tokyo, 15. August 1959 Dr. Paul Tillich Harvard Divinity School 45 Francis Avenue Cambridge, Mass. Dear Dr. Tillich: We have been delighted to learn from Dean Carman of our American Committee that you will be able to accept our invitation to visit Japan in May and June of 1960. The purpose of this letter is to extend our official invitation on behalf of the Japan Committee and to set forth our proposed financial arrangements for you trip and to suggest certain other activities in Japan apart from your duties in Kyoto. With regard to financial arrangements, this Committee is prepared to cover the following: First class, round trip air transportation for you and Mrs. Tillich, from New York to Tokyo and return. An allowance of $30.00 a day to cover your lodging, meals, and incidental expenses during the full period of your stay in Japan. Travel within Japan Any necessary expenses for interpreters during your stay. The foregoing arrangement will be effected through the Japan Society in New York, which is authorized to act on our behalf in the United States. We have requested Mr. Douglas W. Overton, the Executive Director of the Japan Society, to communicate with you in the near future to discuss further details and answer any questions you may have concerning the arrangements. We shall appreciate any thoughts you may have concerning your actual schedule and itinerary in Japan. Presumably you will be in the Kyoto area under the aegis of Dr. Ariga for about three weeks. Beyond that we would suggest that you spend another three weeks with us here in Tokyo and about two weeks in the north. It is our hope that you will be willing to give several public lectures while you are with us. Possibilities might include appearances at Tokyo University, the International Christian University, the Tokyo Union Theological Seminary, and the International House itself. Even more important, however, would be some round-table discussions with Japanese scholars. We have found that such meeting, which take place privately and in a relaxed atmosphere here at the International House, can be very productive. We put forth the foregoing merely as our suggestions, and we shall welcome your own views in the matter. In the meantime, we want you to know how very

Letters

153

much we are looking forward to this visit from you and Mrs. Tillich. We shall do our very best to make you comfortable here and to make your visit both profitable and pleasant. Sincerely yours, Yasaka Takagi Chairman

154

Letters

(10) Michio Royama to Paul Tillich, Tokyo 29. August 1959 Professor Paul Tillich Harvard Divinity School Cambridge, Massachusetts Dear Professor Tillich: Right before leaving on his vacation, Mr. Shigeru Matsumoto, Executive Secretary of the Japan Committee for International Interchange, requested that I send you a list the names of persons who have up to the present come to Japan and gone to America under the auspices of that committee and its counterpart, the American Committee for Intellectual Interchange under Professor Henry J. Carman of Columbia University. It was his hope that they might be of assistance to you in considering the committee’s invitation to Mrs. Tillich and you. Yours sincerely Michio Royama Assistant

Letters

155

(11) Paul Tillich to Yasaka Takagi, Massachusetts, 14. September 1959 Harvard Divinity School 14 Francis Avenue Cambridge 38, Massachusetts September 14,1959 Mr. Yasaka Takagi Chairman Japan Committee for Intellectual Interchange The International House of Japan, Inc. 2 Toriizaka-machi, Azabu, Minato-ku Tokyo, Japan Dear Mr. Takagi: Your letter of August 15th has reached me with some delay because of changes of addresses during the summer. Mrs. Tillich and I now accept your invitation definitely, and we are very satisfied with the conditions you put forward in your letter. I have already approached my New York travel agent and I shall inform you as soon as I have a reservation for the trip from New York (or Boston) to Tokyo. For the return trip, we are considering the western route over India-Europe. But we want to dedicate all the time that will be useful to you in Japan; and certainly, three weeks in Kyoto and three weeks in Tokyo would be excellent. I am not quite clear as to what you mean by two weeks in the North. Does this refer to particular universities and if so, to which? Would another stay of about a week after the semester be advisable (for instance, in the mountains)? I suppose that the hotel reservations will be made from your end. I have only one wish for myself: be to free from mosquitoes; and one for Mrs. Tillich: that it not be too hot! Otherwise, we are open for whatever your recommend. With respect to your letter suggestions, I want to emphasize that I also prefer round-table discussions, but that I accept all your suggestions for Tokyo. I suppose that the situation is similar in Kyoto and the North. And I imagine that English is preferable to German. But of course, I am open for both, without difference. A question which is not yet urgent, but which must be largely settled before I depart is the subject-matter of the lectures. I would like to receive suggestions from your side, supposing that in Kyoto the emphasis will be on the philosophical, in Tokyo, on the theological side. I myself am prepared to discuss all problems of systematic theology, philosophy of religion, and the relation of religion to the different sections of culture. If you have chosen and I have confirmed them, I could bring with me a minimum of manuscripts (because of the weight of baggage).

156

Letters

I look forward with greatest anticipation to my stay in Japan and hope that my visit will be worth your kindness and your effort. Gratefully yours, Paul Tillich PT: gl Signed in writer’s absence from Cambridge. Copy to: Mr. Douglas W. Overton, Exce. Director Japan Society, Inc. 18 East Fiftieth Street New York 22. New York

Letters

157

(12) Yasaka Takagi to Paul Tillich, Tokyo 13. Oktober 1959 October 13, 1959 Professor Paul Tillich Harvard Divinity School 45 Francis Avenue Cambridge 38, Massachusetts Dear Professor Tillich: Thank you very much for your letter of September 14, which has duly reached me. We are most grateful for your acceptance of our invitation to visit Japan on our Intellectual Interchange program. We have no definite plan yet for your visit to places other than Tokyo and Kyoto. I would like very much to work out more detailed plans with suggestions for travel in the neighboring places, perhaps including some mountain resorts. We will do our best in making necessary hotel reservation, but the International House of Japan in Tokyo will probably be the most satisfactory headquarters for you during your stay in this part of Japan. We will be thinking of your concern about heat mosquitos. With regard to your lectures, I had a conference with Professor Ariga, Takeuchi and Nishitani at Kyoto University, and they will be writing their suggestions directly to you. As for your lectures in Tokyo – there are requests already made by institutions like the International Christians University – I would favor a broad approach, to include philosophical questions, although it is true that there are more scholars here interested in theology. If you would approve the idea of having your lectures in both places published at same later date, it would be most helpful if you would give your thought to organizing the lectures to cover various subjects you choose in philosophy, religion, and the relation of religion to political problems and other aspects of civilization. We are looking forward, both in Kyoto and Tokyo, with the greatest anticipation to your visit and hope sincerely that you and Mrs. Tillich will find it worthwhile. From our side it will be the realization of our long-cherished hope. With warmest regards, Sincerely yours, Yasaka Takagi Chairman Shigeru Matsumoto Secretary P.S. Signed in Dr. Takagi’s absence from Tokyo.

158

Letters

(13) Douglas W. Overton to Yasaka Takagi, New York 14. Oktober 1959 Japan Society, Inc. 112 East 64th Street New York 21, N. Y. October 14,1959 Dear Yasak: Dr. Tillich’s office has inquired about the approximate date he can plan on leaving Japan. My records here do not indicate exactly when you expect him in Japan and how long he will be there. Could you please let me know at your earliest convenience. He will be going on to India, and it is important for him to have some dates to plan on. All the best Sincerely yours Douglas W. Overton Executive Director Copy for Miss Grace C. Leonard, Secretary to Dr. Tillich Dr. Yasaka Takagi International House of Japan 2 Toriizaka-machi, Azabu Minato-ku Tokyo, Japan

Letters

159

(14) Yasaka Takagi to Douglas W. Overton, Tokyo 21. Oktober 1959 Dear Doug: In replay to your latter of October 14, I hasten to write that our invitation to Dr. and Ms. Tillich was to have them visit Japan from about eight weeks beginning around May 5 and terminating around June 30. This is our tentative suggestion, and we would be only too glad to make any adjustment in our schedule to suit their convenience regarding the date of their arrival or departure. As a matter of fact we have not yet worked out the plan for their travel outside of Kyoto and Tokyo, and hope that Dr. Tillich will feel entirely free to make any suggestion. With cordial regards, Sincerely Yasaka Takagi Mr. Douglas W. Overton Japan Society, Inc. 112 East 65 th Street New York 21, N. Y.

160

Letters

(15) Grace C. Leonard to Douglas W. Overton, New York 3. November 1959 Harvard Divinity School 45 Francis Avenue Cambridge 38, Massachusetts November 3, 1959 Mr. Douglas W. Overton, Exec, Director The Japan Society 112 East 64th St. New York 21, New York Dear Mr. Overton: In reply to your letter of October 28th , I would like to say that Dr. Tillich agrees completely with the suggested dates for his Japan visit. The eight weeks would begin on Thursday, May 5 and terminate on Friday, July 1st , 1960. He is more than glad to leave to you the planning of his itinerary while he is in Japan. Reservation have already been made through Plaut Travel, Inc. (Mr. Walter Plaut is a close friend of theirs in New York) for departure by plane on April 29th . They plan to arrive in Tokyo on May 5th . But I will keep in touch with you about exact details. Sincerely yours, Grace C. Leonard Personal Secretary to Dr. Tillich

Letters

161

(16) Tetsutaro Ariga to Paul Tillich, Kyoto 5. November 1959 Faculty of Letters Kyoto Universtity Kyoto, Japan November 5, 1959 Professor Paul Tillich Harvard Divinity School 45 Francis Avenue Cambridge 38, Mass., U. S. A. Dear Professor Tillich: I am so happy to learn that you have definitely accepted the offer of the Intellectual Interchange Program to bring you to Japan for lecture and conferences. I understand that the Program’s committee will take every care to make the stay of the Tillichs here in Japan as comfortable as possible and, above all, not to overcrowd your schedules. Even the committee, however, would not be able to control our climate here. I only hope that our rainy season, which starts around June 10 and lasts for a month, will not bring rain in full measure. This year we had many cloudy days but not much rain during the season. The month on May is usually sunny and comfortable. When Dr. Takagi came to Kyoto a few weeks ago, I together with my colleagues discussed with him about your programs in this area; but nothing very definite was settled then. I hope we shall be able to work out plans for you in the not distant future. But it is quite certain that our plans will include at least the following items: A series of lectures at Kyoto University on the religious significance of contemporary philosophy. One or two lectures in philosophical theology at Kwansei Gakuin University and Doshisha University, both major Christian universities in this area. Visits to some Buddhist and Shinto centers. Conference with secular philosophers. As for the themes of your lectures, we thought it better to let you choose your own subjects. Please give whatever thoughts closest to your mind without much regard to what audiences you will have to address. Japanese audience will appreciate being into a serious thinking rather than hearing a too didactically adapted lecture. Yours sincerely. Tetsutaro Ariga

162

Letters

(17) Grace C. Leonard(Personal Secretary to Dr. Tillich) to Yasaka Takagi and Shigeharu Matsumoto, Massachusetts 23. February 1960 Harvard Divinity School 45 Francis Avenue Cambridge 38, Massachusetts February 23, 1960 Dr. Yasaka Takagi, Chairman Dr. Shigeharu Matsumoto, Secretary Japan Committee for International Interchange The International House of Japan Inc. 2 Toriizaka-machi, Azabu, Minato-ku Tokyo, Japan Dear Dr. Takagi and Dr. Matsumoto: Professor Tillich has asked me to contact you about further details for his trip to Japan. The present schedule calls for the arrival of Dr. and Mrs. Tillich in Tokyo on May 2nd . I shall be sending you the exact flight number and the time of arrival later. They would like to stay overnight in Tokyo before going to Kyoto and if you think that the best place for them to stay is the International House, will you have someone from your office take care of making reservation for them. Will you let him know the exact dates he is expected to lecture in Kyoto and in Tokyo? What lectures plans are expected of him for the remaining two weeks after the six spent lecturing in other parts of Japan? How many prepared lectures should Professor Tillich take with him? He has noted your suggested subjects in your letter of October 13th and if you have other specific topics that you know certain groups would prefer over others, do not hesitate to let him know. In fact, he would find suggestions helpful. He and Mrs. Tillich have given up plans to complete their trip by going around the world after leaving Japan, so have decided that they would like to stay at least an additional ten days – at their own expense, of course – in Japan at some resort place. These are all the questions that Dr. Tillich has at this time and he will look forward to hearing from you. Sincerely yours, Grace C. Leonard (Mrs.) Personal Secretary to Dr. Tillich

Letters

163

(18) Grace C. Leonard (Personal Secretary to Dr. Tillich) to Douglas W. Overton, Massachusetts 23. February 1960 Harvard Divinity School 45 Francis Avenue Cambridge 38, Massachusetts February 23, 1960 Mr. Douglas W. Overton, Exec. Director Japan Society, Inc. 112 East 64th Street New York 21, N. Y. Dear Mr. Overton: Professor Tillich has asked that I inquire the method payment to him for his travel expenses for the Japan trip. Plaut Travel, Inc. in New York is making the arrangements for him and Mr. Tillich with a departure date of April 28th from Boston, via Los Angeles and Honolulu. Will the usual expenses incident to travel apply, such as hotel accommodations, taxis, etc.? Undoubtedly, some payment to Plaut Travel will be necessary before their departure date. Will you let me know what is usual in such cases? Thank you for your help. We are also in direct touch with the Japan Committee about the detailed plans for Dr. Tillich’s visit. Sincerely yours, Grace C. Leonard (Mrs.) Personal Secretary to Dr. Tillich

164

Letters

(19) Douglas W. Overton to Grace C. Leonard, New York 25. February 1960 Japan Society, Inc. 112 East 64th Street New York 21, N. Y. Plaza 1-4213 February 25, 1960 Mrs. Grace C. Leonard Harvard Divinity School 45 Francis Avenue Cambridge 38, Massachusetts Dear Mrs. Leonard: Thank you for your letter of February 23 concerning Dr. Tillich’s trip to Japan. With reference to travel, will you please have Plaut Travel, Inc. issue two first-class, round-trip air tickets from Boston to Tokyo and return, and bill us for the same. The living allowance for Mr. and Mrs. Tillich while on route to Japan and while in Japan directly under the Japan Committee for Intellectual Interchange totals $30.00 a day. This can be remitted to Dr. Tillich in dollars (by us here) or in yen(by Dr. Takagi in Tokyo), as be requests. I suggest he defer action until he reaches Tokyo and discusses the matter with Dr. Takagi. With kindest regards, Sincerely yours Douglas W. Overton Executive Director Copy for Dr. Yasaka Takagi

Letters

165

(20) Grace C. Leonard to Testuo Kohmoto, Mass. 4. March 1960 Harvard Divinity School Cambridge 38, Mass. March 4, 1960 Mr. Testuo Kohmoto, President Shinkyo Suppansha Protestant Publishing Co., Ltd. No. 1, 3-Chome, Shin-Ogawa-Machi Shinjuku-ku, Tokyo Japan Dear Mr. Kohmoto: Dr. Tillich will gladly meet you and young group of invited theologians during his stay in Tokyo. Present plans are for him to lecture the first three weeks of May in Kyoto and the second three following weeks in Tokyo. I would imagine sometime during the last week of the month of May would be a suitable time to arrange such a meeting. Dr. and Mrs. Tillich will be arriving in Japan on May 2nd, going to Kyoto the following day. They will be in Japan until the first of July during which time Dr. Tillich will be lecturing under the auspices of the Japan Committee for Intellectual Interchange. He and Mrs. Tillich will probably stay on for an additional two weeks of vacation somewhere in Japan. The two persons who have been in charge of arranging the details for Dr. Tillich’s visit are: Professor Yasaka Takagi, Chairman and Mr. Shigeharu Matsumoto, Executive Secretary Japan Committee for International Interchange The International House of Japan, Inc. 2 Toriizaka-machi, Azabu, Minato-ku, Tokyo I would suggest that you contact them about arranging the exact date in Tokyo for your meeting. Professor Tillich looks forward very much to meeting his Japanese publisher. Sincerely Yours, Grace C. Leonard (Mrs.) Personal Secretary to Dr. Tillich

166

Letters

(21) Yasaka Takagi to Paul Tillich, Tokyo 11. March 1960 March 11, 1960 Professor Paul Tillich Harvard Divinity School 45 Francis Avenue Cambridge 38, Mass. Dear Professor Tillich: Enclosed is a copy of the Schedule tentatively prepared for you. I submit it to you for general approval and modification. I believe the schedule is clear, but you may want to note that where not otherwise indicated, your residence during your visit will be the International House. Reservations have been made accordingly. Subjects of lectures are suggested, and whenever you feel changes are in order, please feel absolutely free to make alterations. You will notice several instances of continued lectures, two sets of two lectures in Tokyo (May 16. –19), and a set of five in Kyoto, beginning May 25 and ending June 10, on the general subject Philosophy of Religion. No word has as yet come from either Doshisha or Kwansei Gakuin, specifying any particular subject, and again, if you have suggestions, we shall welcome them. Not knowing whether it is your custom to go to church or not, we may have presumed too mach in suggesting sermons on Sundays. Should you prefer to be quite free, please say; for I am afraid this schedule as it stands may be a little heavy. Meanwhile, please notify us of any additional or alternate activities that especially may interest you. Sincerely yours, Yasaka Takagi Chairman

Letters

167

(22) Shigeharu Matsumoto to Grace C. Leonard, Tokyo 12. March 1960 March 12, 1960 Mrs. Grace C. Leonard Harvard Divinity School 45 Francis Avenue Cambridge 38, Mass. Dear Mrs. Leonard: Several days ago Dr. Takagi sent a copy of Dr. Tillich’s itinerary, which I trust has arrived in good order. There remain several points to clarify, however, and so I write this latter. In your letter of February 23nd, you mentioned that Dr. and Mrs. Tillich would arrive in Tokyo on May 2nd . The present itinerary shows arrival on May 5th , but it fact we have made reservations at the International House from May 2nd . Actually I think the interval of rest after arrival by plane is very good, for the trans-Pacific flight at best is tiring, and so we are making no commitments for those first days. In your letter you also mentioned their going to Kyoto at once. Earlier correspondence, specifically our letter of last August 15th , does indeed convey the impression that Kyoto is to be a sort point of departure. Nevertheless, it was our intention to give Dr. Tillich at least two weeks in Tokyo first, and as plans have been developed the journey has taken the shape you now see. Two committees, lists of which are enclosed, one in Kyoto, one in Tokyo have worked over the details of the schedule and adjusted engagements to the plans and schedules of several institutions. Hotel and necessary travel reservations have been made accordingly, and so I trust that Dr. Tillich will find the frame satisfactory. One request has come from Dr. Alfred Schmidt for Dr. Tillich to speak before tha Ost Asiatische Gesellschaft of Tokyo. For several reasons I prefer to wait a bit on this and shall write separately to Dr. Tillich about this later. We have just sent a few publications, which describe the House and its activities. Should Dr. Tillich have any questions please let me know. Sincerely yours, Shigeru Matsumoto Managing Director

168

Letters

(23) Yasaka Takagi to Douglas W. Overton, Tokyo 14. March 1960 March 14, 1960 Mr. Douglas W. Overton 112 East 64th Street New York 21, N. Y. Dear Doug: Thank you for the copy of your letter of February 25th to Mrs. Leonard, concerning Dr. Tillich’s travel arrangements. I should appreciate your advancing to Dr. Tillich per diem for ten days, a check in the amount of $300 being sent to him as follows on or before April 15, 1960: Paul Tillich Harvard Divinity School 45 Francis Avenue Cambridge 38, Massachusetts This will assure him ample travel founds, and from the time of his arrival here, we shall handle other payments in yen, unless I notify you to the contrary. Sincerely yours, Yasaka Takagi

Letters

169

(24) Yasaka Takagi to Paul Tillich, Tokyo 28. March 1960 Dear Dr. Tillich: In my last letter I tried to indicate to you that we are prepared to make any change in the tentative schedule sent on March 11. We are realizing more and more that we should not make the mistake of crowding the schedule too heavily. Professor Takeuchi has written from Kyoto recently expressing the same concern. The schedule was, however, the result of our effort in several meeting to turn down a number of requests from various quarters to hear you, but we are anxious to know your feelings. The purpose of this letter is to convey to you sincere desire to plan a program acceptable from your viewpoint. We are ready to follow any suggestion coming from you, even for a drastic reduction in the number of lectures. In this informal personal letter, I should like to extend my invitation to you and Mrs. Tillich to be my guests at a small country house at Karuizawa, toward the end of your stay in Japan, for several days of complete rest in that summer resort. I think I am expressing to you the desire of us all both in Kyoto and Tokyo to make your visit as comfortable as possible. With warm regards, Sincerely yours, Yasaka Takagi Dr. Paul Tillich Harvard Divinity School 45 Francis Avenue Cambridge 38, Mass.

170

Letters

(25) Tetsutaro Ariga to Paul Tillich, Kyoto 29. March 1960 Faculty of Letters Kyoto University Kyoto, Japan March 29, 1960 Professor Paul Tillich Harvard Divinity School 45 Francis Avenue Cambridge 38, Mass. U. S. A. Dear Professor Tillich: I believe that you have already received a copy of the “tentative schedule” for you and your wife sent from the Intellectual Interchange Committee in Tokyo. I only want to confirm to you that those who are responsible for your programs in the Kyoto area are duly at work making all sorts of arrangements for the Tillichs. The parts of your Kyoto-Nishinomiya schedule that involve your addresses in some form or other will be the following: 1. Five lectures at Kyoto University: primarily for the students of the Department of Philosophy. Two hours each including translation. 2. One lecture at the School of Theology, Doshisha University. Two hours including translation. An afternoon conference with the theological faculty. The Doshisha circles are interested to hear from you a discussion of the methode of theology and something about your approach to the problem of Christianity and other religions. 3. One lecture to the general student body of Doshisha University. 1 1/2 hours including translation. 4. A short chapel talk (15 minutes) and a lecture at Kwansei Gakuin University. 1 1/2 hours for the lecture including translation. The Kwansei Gakuin circles are interested to hear from you a discussion of Christology. There will be a conference with the faculty members at tea time. 5. A Sunday morning sermon at the Fowler Chapel, Doshisha University. Besides, there will be arranged: 1. A conference with Philosophers in the area. 2. A conference with Buddhist scholars in this area. We would appreciate it very much if you would give us subjects of your lectures at your earliest convenience. In case you feel the above program is too heavy for you, please tell us so frankly. We shall also be glad to hear from you

Letters

171

any comment on your schedule in this area. We would try our best to comply to your requests. You must be very busy getting ready for your oriental trip. We at this end are eagerly looking forward to welcoming you to Japan and especially to Kyoto. With warmest personal greetings to you and your wife, Your respectfully, Tetsutaro Ariga

172

Letters

(26) Tetsutaro Ariga to Paul Tillich, Kyoto 2. April 1960 Faculty of Letters Kyoto University Kyoto, Japan April 2, 1960 Professor Paul Tillich Harvard Divinity School 45 Francis Avenue Cambridge 38, Mass. Dear Professor Tillich: I have just been informed by President Hirasawa that when he visited you at Harvard you inquired him as to where to send your lecture material for having its copies made. I suggest that you will send it immediately to the Intellectual Interchange Committee, International Hause, 2 Toriizaka, Azabu, Minato-ku, Tokyo. Kindly indicate, as far as possible, for which occasions your manuscript are intended. I will immediately contact the Tokyo committee regarding this matter. Yours sincerely Tetsutaro Ariga

Letters

173

(27) Paul Tillich to International Hause, Mass. 3. April 1960 (Telegram) 5034/KX3871/ZT1652/SL104 Cambridge Mass 28 31 1528 Devie LT Inteercul Tokyo (Intercul Shirabe NTT) KIDNEY STONE ATTACK NECESSITATES OPERATION CAN STAY IN JAPAN EIGHT WEEKS AS PLANNED BUT EARLIEST ARRIVAL MIDDLE OF MAY IS TRIP STILL POSSIBLE PAUL TILLICH

174

Letters

(28) Grace C. Leonard to Yasaka Takagi and Shigeharu, Mass. 5. April 1960 Harvard Divinity School 45 Francis Avenue Cambridge 38, Massachusetts University 8-7600, Extension 769 April 5, 1960 Professor Yasaka Takagi, Chairman Mr. Shigeharu Matsumoto, Executive Secretary The Japan Committee for Intellectual Interchange The International House of Japan, Inc. 2 Triizaka-machi, Azabu, Minato-ku Tokyo, Japan Dear Mr. Takagi and Mr. Matsumoto: This letter is a follow-up to Professor Tillich’s cablegram that he sent on March 31st . It read as follows: “Kidney stone attack necessitates operation. Eight weeks visit in Japan still possible. Earliest arrival middle of May. Is trip still possible?” This was cabled directly to INTERCUL, TOKYO, as suggested by Mr. Douglas Overton in New York. It went via Western Union. Dr. Tillich is still awaiting your answer by either airmail letter or cablegram as to whether or not the trip can still be worked out from your point of view. The present situation is that Dr. Tillich enters the hospital on April 10th for removal of the Kidney stone by operation. His doctor estimates a total of six weeks for recovery. This means that the earliest he and Mrs. Tillich would be able to leave here would be about May 15th . It makes no difference to Dr. Tillich about how you might want to rearrange the schedule as they had not made any personal plans at this time. Dr. Tillich greatly regrets all the disturbance and trouble this will cause everyone concerned, but he hopes that the trip will still be possible. His doctor is optimistic about a good recovery, as his physical condition is remarkably sound for a man of his age. I shall keep you informed of the situation, but in the meantime, we await your answer to the cablegram. With kindest regards – and regrets for this unavoidable development form Dr. Tillich, Sincerely yours, Grace C. Leonard (Mrs.) Personal Secretary to Dr. Tillich Cc: Mr. Douglas Overton Japan Society, New York

Letters

175

(29) Paul Tillich to Yasaka Takagi, Mass. 14. April 1960 (Telegram) 5156 KX2281 WTB2906 TASJ733 WLFLN670 Cambridge Mass LT Mr. Takagi Intercul Tokyo FAVORABLE TURN IN KIDNEY CONDITION MAKES ORIGINAL SCHEDULE POSSIBLE ARRIVING TUESDAY MAY THIRD LETTER FOLLOWS PAUL TILLICH

176

Letters

(30) Paul Tillich to Yasaka Takagi und Shigeharu Matsumoto, Mass. 14. April 1960 Harvard Divinity School 45 Francis Avenue Cambridge Massachusetts April 14, 1960 Dr. Yasaka Takagi, Chairman Dr. Shigematsu Matsumoto, Secretary Japan Committee for Intellectual Interchange The International House of Japan, Inc. 2 Triizaka-machi, Azabu, Minato-ku Tokyo, Japan Dear Dr. Takagi und Dr. Matsumoto: It must have been a kind of shock for you, as it was for me, when I had to send the cablegram telling you that it would be necessary to delay my coming to Japan. I thank you very much for indicating that even a delay would not make the trip impossible. Since the last two days, the situation has radically changed. No external operation was necessary and I was able to leave the hospital after a few days. The surgeon and the internist who treated me agreed that I would be able to leave here as planned on the 28th of April, so no changes in the program you sent me are necessary. There are a few points in the tentative schedule that I would like now to bring up. For the May 13th lecture at International House, I would prefer the second topic and would suggest calling it “The Basic Ideas of Religious Socialism.” The two sermons listed for the following week I would like to reduce to one. I shall leave to your discretion whether you prefer that I preach at International Christian University on Wednesday, May 18th or at Tokyo Union Church on Sunday, May 22nd . I fully agree with the rest of the schedule and would like you to know that Mrs. Tillich and I are looking forward with great pleasure to the visit. Sincerely yours, Paul Tillich Cc: Mr. Douglas Overton Japan Society New York City Note: Leave Honolulu, May 2. 1:30 a.m. via Pan American Airlines, Flight #1 Arrive Tokyo, May 3, 6:50 a.m.

Letters

177

(31) Ko Hirasawa to Paul Tillich, Kyoto. 21. April 1960 Kyoto University Kyoto, Japan April 21, 1960 Prof. Paul Tillich Harvard Divinity School 45 Francis Avenue Cambridge 38, Mass. U. S. A. Dear Prof. Tillich: I was very much pleased to have an opportunity of meeting you on the occasion of my visit to your country. At that time you told me that you will visit Japan in the near future. Mr. Yasaka Takagi, Chairman of the Japan Committee for Intellectual Interchange, who is the responsible person to invite you in Japan, also informed me that you will come to Kyoto late in May. On behalf of Kyoto University, it gives me much pleasure to invite you to lecture here in Kyoto University. Both Prof. Tetsutaro Ariga and Prof. Yoshinori Takeuchi are already making necessary arrangements for your lectures here. When you need some necessary information, please do not hesitate to contact either Prof. Ariga, or you may write to me. Prof. Ariga will let you know the schedule being planned you in detail while you are in Kyoto. Personally, I am eagerly looking forward to renewing out friendship here. My warmest greeting to you and Mrs. Tillich. Your sincerely. Ko Hirasawa President Kyoto University

178

Letters

(32) Howard B. Haines to Paul Tillich, Tokyo 30. April 1960 Tokyo Union Church 4, 1-chome Onden, Shibuya-ku Tokyo Japan Telephone 40-0047 Reverend Howard B. Haines, Pastor Manse Telephone 34-7057 Reverend Albert W. Huston, Assistant April 30, 1960 Prof. Paul Tillich c/o International House 2 Toriizaka-machi, Azabu Minato-ku Dear Dr. Tillich We are very pleased that it has been possible to fit into your busy schedule time to preach at Union Church. Mrs. Kako has informed us that she has put on your schedule the four o’clock service on May 22nd . Our four o’clock service is relatively small; it includes a number of missionaries who are active in Japanes churches in the mornines, and others – both westerners and Japanes. It is a relaxed time of day, and this is reflected in the nature of the service, which is sometimes followed by a period of discussion, as we hope it can be on the day when you are with us. On the 22nd I will stop for you – or arrange for someone else to – at about 3:30 at International House, unless you have some other suggestion about it. We would be pleased if Mrs. Tillich could come, too. If you have a sermon topic to announce, or related scripture or hymns to suggest, these would be appreciated. You may possibly remember that my seminary roommate, Harry Dorman, was one of your earlist student at Union Seminary, back in 1933-4. But I myself have only followed from after I expect to be at the Ministers Seminar Conference at Union this Summer. Very best wishes Howard B. Haines

Letters

179

(33) Tetsutaro Ariga to Paul Tillich, Kyoto, 2. May 1960 THE INTERNATIONAL HOUSE OF JAPAN TORIIZAKA – MACHI, AZABU, MINATO-KU, TOKYO TEL, 48-8351 CABLE: INTERCUL TOKYO May, 2nd Dear Professor Tillich; I am writing this letter in order to invite you to supper on Tuesday, June 7 th, in Kyoto, with a small group of English speaking people (missionaries and Japanese theologians including myself) interested in the study of Christianity relationship with other religions. We would be extremely happy if you could accept our invitation and give, after supper, a short talk on a theme such as “The Demonic and Religious” (this is only a suggestion), to be followed by a discussion. If Mrs. Tillich should care to join the group, she will be most welcome. Otherwise, we would see to it that she be guided to any place she likes to visit that evening. Yours cordially, Tetsutaro Ariga

180

Letters

(34) Yasaka Takagi to Alfred Schmidt, Tokyo. 6. May 1960 Japan Committee for Intellectual Interchange The International House of Japan, Inc. 2 Toriizaka-machi, Azabu, Minato-ku, Tokyo Tel. (481)8351 May 6, 1960 Dear Dr. Schmidt: With reference to your wish to have a special meeting for your Association with Professor Paul Tillich, I report to write that the preparatory committee has decided, after consulting Professor Tillich, that it would be unwise in the light of his present schedule to plan any additional meeting or lecture, chiefly on account of his health. I hope you will understand the situation, and would suggest that your members try to attend some of the meeting on the program, wherever practicable. Your very sincerely, Yasaka Takagi Chairman Dr. Alfred Schmidt Directors Association of Evangelical Academy 2370, 1-chome, Araijuku Ohta-ku, Tokyo

Letters

181

(35) Howard B. Haines to Paul Tillich, Tokyo, 13. May 1960 Tokyo Union Church 4, 1-chome Onden, Shibuya-ku Tokyo Japan Telephone 40-0047 Reverend Howard B. Haines, Paster Manse Telephone 34-7057 Reverend Albert W. Huston, Assistant May 13, 1960 Prof. Paul Tillich c/o International House 2 Toriizaka-machi, Azabu Minato-ku Dear Dr. Tillich I was happy to greet you on Tuesday, and look forward to welcoming you to Union Church. Since you must have the details of many engagements to keep in mind, it may be helpful to review plans for your visit to Union Church. On the 22nd I will plan to stop for you at about 3:30 P. M. at International House, to bring both of you to Union Church. The service is at four o’clock. I will provide a simple gown for you, and we will process with the choir. I will plan to conduct the service of worship, and have you preach; and I understand that you will preach for 30-35 minutes. You may also wish to read scripture: we can decide upon that at the time. Following the service we will go downstairs to the community hall, and those who wish will come there for a half hour or so of greeting and perhaps some question and answer exchange. Then we will plan to take you along for supper, and return you to International House early in the evening. Don’t expect a large congregation! But I think you will find it an interested and responsive one. Sincerely Howard Haines

182

Letters

(36) Yoshio Noro to Paul Tillich, Tokyo, 16. May 1960 May 16, 1960 Dear Dr. Tillich: Since I was taught by you at Union Theological Seminary while I was studying there for my doctorate, I have been reading and appreciating your theological thought very much indeed. But, I was asked to raise some questions concerning your theology before attending an advanced seminar about your theology. I think I can see how you reply to there following questions of mine, since I am rather familiar of your way of thinking thought your thought is too deep for me to fathom. I had from your teaching and books, I should like to raise the following two points which I feel that there might be a possibility of dissenting from you. 1. As I know that your thought is different both form the positivistic idea of a personal God and from the pantheistic – mystical idea of God, I still feel that you have not done justice to the dimension of the personal symbol of God. I suppose that you are very much accustomed to this kind of criticism through your colleague Dr. Niebuhr an others. But, it seems to me that your idea of the Ground of Being seems lacking the strong element of I-Thou relationship in it. I mean particularly when you speak about man’s participation of this Ground of Being. Would you not think that there is still a very strong transcendence and the relation which can only be expressed by a symbol of a personal encounter even within the ecstatic and mystical dimension of the encounter of God with man? Though you speak about it, I seem to feel that somewhat your emphasis is not upon this encounter but rather mystical participation. Am I hopelessly immersed within the positivistic, nominalistic philosophical background? Of course, this question concerns itself to the doctrine of the Holy Sprit. 2. When you speak about the abysmal character of the Ground of Being and the demonic power in history etc., I feel that somehow I am led into the sphere in which I do not need my existential dimension of living. It seems to me that it is a speculation which would seem to Bultmann as a mythology, and which would not lead me to my existential decision but rather to lead me to a position from which detachedly I observe God theoretically. Would you not say that you know too much of God in this point? Would you not say that you are in a philosophical Hybris in this point? Why are we not resigned to the fact that we better concentrate ourselves to the existential truths of Christianity? It seems to me that the combination in your way of the theological and philosophical truths has the advantage of the greatness of a system but that it lacks an earnestness of decision. Or is this only because I belong to a tradition which emphasizes existential aspects of faith in terms of experientialism. I belong a Methodist tradition.

Letters

183

But these of my questions are really my struggles through which I came to appreciate your greatness of thought more profoundly. I hope that you will pardon my slowness to learn much more from you, and that you will kindly teach me in many ways. I remain, Truly yours, Yoshio Noro Assistant professor of Systematic theology Aoyama Gakuin University Tokyo, Japan

184

Letters

(37) Harald Oehler to Paul Tillich, Tokyo. 16. May 1960 German speaking Evangelical Church-Community Tokyo-Yokohama May 16, 1960 Paster: H. Oehler, Tel. 921-2921 Kunkyo-ku, Tomizaka 2-20 Dear Mr. Dr. Tillich: According to our talk last Friday in which you kindly declared you readiness to give a lecture in the German East-Asiatic Society in accordance and connection to our Church-Community I today feel free to ask you if you could speak about the following subjects On Wednesday, June 15 at 6.00 P.M. On Wednesday, June 22 at 6.00 P. M. Subject-proposals: The reciprocal (or mutual) effects between modern society and Christian faith. The uncertainty of the present spiritual situation, motives and solutions for the future. Religion or atheism as extreme cornerstones of our spiritual situation. How can we find a sense and purpose of our life again [. . .] the sceptic attitude? Because the lecture would not be held at our Evangelical Community only but in the German East-Asiatic Society (O. A. G. = Ostastiatische Gesellschaft) it would be appreciat if the subject would be not too specificly connected to the Protestant problems only. I look forward on your kind and positive answer and hope that you can give us the distinct details about the title of the lecture and the date, (but only Wednesday) at your earliest convenience. With best regards I thankfully remain Yours H. Oehler P.S. May I ask you for delivering My best regards to Mrs. Tillich, too? Mrs. Oehler and I hope to se you in our House after your returning from Kyoto.

Letters

185

(38) Shinichi Hisamatsu to Paul Tillich, Kyoto. 16. May 1960 Shunko-In Myoshinji-cho Hanazono Ukyo-ku Kyoto, Japan May 16,1960 Professor Paul Tillich The International House of Japan 2 Toriizaka-Machi Azabu, Minato-ku Tokyo, Japan Dear Professor Tillich: I was greatly concerned upon learning of your recent illness, but I am unspeakably happy and honored that you and Mrs. Tillich, in good health, have now arrived in Japan. I eagerly await your and Mrs. Tillich’s forthcoming visit to the city of my abode, Kyoto, the ancient capital of Japan, and look forward to the opportunity to meet with you once again, renewing the spiritual friendship begun during my stay at Harvard University. With warmest regards, Sincerely yours, Shinichi Hisamatsu

186

Letters

(39) Richard DeMartino to Paul Tillich, Kyoto May 17. 1960 c/o M. ABE 362 KAMIGORYO BAMBA-CHO KAMIGYO-KU KYOTO, JAPAN May 17, 1960 Dear Professor Tillich, May I welcome you and Mrs. Tillich to Japan. I hope you have not been too disappointed in Tokyo. I can assure you that you will find Kyoto quite different. Mr. Hisamatsu would like to invite you and Mrs. Tillich for private, informal dinners, and wishes me to ask you if this would be possible for you Wednesday evening June 1st and Friday evening June 3rd . He also wishes, one of those evenings, to show you the famous rock garden at Ryoan-ji. Eagerly looking forward to your arrival in Kyoto, and with warmest regards – as well to Mrs. Tillich, Respectfully yours, Richard DeMartino

Letters

187

(40) Harald Orehler to Paul Tillich, Tokyo. 21. May 1960 Tokyo, 14th of May, 1960 Paster H. Oehler Tel. 921-2921 Bunkyo-ku, Tomizaka 2-20 Dear Mr. Tillich: One of the most ardent Christian professors at the huge Waseda-University at Tokyo asked me urgingly to write you a letter with the following demand. His name is Prof. Sakaeda. He is sponsoring my one-year-old “Paul Tillich-studygroup” there. Would you be able to give a lecture at that famous University. The best time would be a Thursday at 1. 00 P. M. (noon-time). But in case that this would be imposible any other time must be able to be arranged too. You are free to choose the subject. When Prof. Emil Brunner delivered a lecturer about the “Spiritual possibilities for the future of Japanese intellectual people” his audience was remarkable. Because your name and theology became a know at this Waseda University we hope you will have a fine chance to give a deep influence to the students. Would you be so kind to give us answer, to Prof. Sakaeda at Daigakuin of Waseda-University or to me directly, as you prefer, as early as possible because of the necessary preparations for this lecture? We thank you very much and heartily. Your sincerely H. Oehler

188

Letters

(41) Paul Tillich to Shinichi Hisamatsu, Tokyo, 20. May 1960 May 20, 1960 Mr. H. S. Hisamatsu Shunko-In Myoshinji-cho Hanazono Ukyo-ku, Kyoto Dear Mr. Hisamatsu: It was the great joy for me to receive your letter, and to be reminded of the wonderful talks I had with you in Cambridge. Mrs. Tillich and I are looking forward to meet you in Kyoto. Very cordially yours, Paul Tillich

Letters

189

(42) Paul Tillich to Harald Oehler, Tokyo. 20. May 1960 Mr. H. Oehler 20, 2-chome, Tomizaka Bunkyo-ku, Tokyo Dear Mr. Oe(h)ler: Thank you for you letters. I am terribly sorry, but most of what you want me to do and what I would like to do is impossible. I am very much overloaded and somehow Weekend by gout attack, which kept me in bed three days and forced me to a strict diet. The only thing I can do would be not a lecture, but a discussion on Wednesday, June 22nd from 5:30 to 7:00 p.m. The students of Waseda University may come to any of all of the following lectures in Tokyo: June 15 (Wed.) 3:30 p.m. Religion and Culture (University of Tokyo) June 21 (Tues.) 10:00 p.m. Theology and Philosophy (Tokyo Union Theological Seminary) June 22 (Wed.) 10:00 p.m. Religion and Culture (Tokyo Union Theological Seminary) June 29 (Wed.) 10:00 p.m. Christianity and Culture (Tokyo Women’s Christian College) It is great pleasure for me to make your acquaintance and to have had a very interesting talk with you. Very cordially yours, Paul Tillich

190

Letters

(43) Harald Oehler to Paul Tillich, Tokyo. 21. May 1960 Pastor Harald Oehler Ev. German speaking Community 2-20 Tomisaka, Bunkyo-ku, Tokyou Tel. 921-2921 Tokyo, May 21, 1960 Dear Professor Tillich: With many thanks I got you kind letter with the positive answer in respect of discussion-meeting with the German East-Asiatic Society in relation to my German speaking Evangelical Community. We are glad and full of thank to have this chance. But in reading the other subjects you speak about in English, let me propose that we choose as subject of the meeting on Wednesday, June 22nd , from 6:00 p.m. The topic: Religion and Culture Just this evening I had a telephone-call from Mr. Dr. Eitel, who is your physician as he told me and he was proposing this subject as that which would be the most important in our group to be talk over. We all hope that you have recovered well from the indisposition you have suffered from this week. I personally regret it very much that you think you will not be able to speak at the Waseda-University. Because of my “Tillich-group” there it would be a big loss. Mr. Prof. Sakaeda told me that he would be content to have you in this university for only a very short lecture, perhaps 30 or 40 minute. I should appreciate very much if you would be able to arrange a lecture in this huge and famous school. With the best regards, the most hearty wishes and the hope that you will be blessed and protected during your trip to Kyoto. I remain Yours sincerely H. Oehler

Letters

191

(44) Yasaka Takagi to Harald Oehler, Tokyo. 21. May 1960 May 21, 1960 Mr. H. Oehler 20, 2-chome, Tomisaka Bunkyo-ku, Tokyo Dear Mr. Oehler: With reference to the conversation I had with Dr. Schmidt together with Dr. Tillich on May 19, about which I presume you must have heard from Dr. Schmidt, I wish to state to you how the Japan Committee for Intellectual Interchange feels about the situation in which Dr. Tillich now finds himself in trying to meet the obligations of a heavy schedule of lectures and meetings. I understood at the above-mentioned conversation that Dr. Tillich, with his characteristic generosity, felt obliged to say that he would consider having a discussion on June 22, but I was frank to say then that I would write directly to you explaining the circumstances and request you to understand our policy in preparing the schedule was to adhere strictly to the rule not to ask Dr. Tillich for more than one lecture a day. In addition to his hospitalization just before his departure, as you must surely know, he has suffered from a severe stack of gout quite recently. Considering his age and the great difference in climate, our Committee feels duty-bound to do whatever possible to safeguard his health. I trust you will be willing to see the situation and agree to drop the engagement of the evening of June 22, on which day he is already scheduled for a lecture and luncheon committee. Sincerely Yasaka Takagi Chairman

192

Letters

(45) Harald Oehler to Yasaka Takagi, Tokyo. 23. May 1960 Paster Harald Oehler Ev. German speaking Community 2-20 Tomisaka, Bunkyo-ku, Tokyou Tel. 921-2921 Tokyo, May 23, 1960 Dear Mr. Takagi: Let me thank you deeply for your kind letter concerning about the meeting of a discussion on Wednesday, June 22 on the evening at 6.00 P.M. I did not ask Mr. Tillich before talking to his doctor, the German Mr. Dr. Eitel. And this doctor was just giving me the advice to ask Mr. Tillich for a lecture or a discussion in the German East-Asiatic Society in combination with our Evangelical Community. He told me also that the attack of gout last week was a small one which is no reason of anxiety. He urgently asked me to tell Mr. Tillich that Dr. Eitel would appreciate it very much to have him as speaker in our German group. And because he there can talk in his native-tongue it will not strain him so much. Therefore let me ask you politely to permit that Mr. Tillich may come to our group for a short while. It is not necessary to have him for hours. One hour will be enough for the whole. Of course, we should like to eat with him together a German dish because the discussion will be held at the OAG (just beside the Canadian Embassy) which has a kitchen with German style. I hope that Mr. Tillich will relax very well in this homelike atmosphere. Will you allow that I protect him according to your principle to safeguard his health as much as possible? In addition to that let me mention that I informed all the members of our German speaking group including Swiss, Dutch and Austrian residents in April already that I shall invite him as a guest to our group. Let me once more express my deepest concern about your letter. But be so kind to agree that Mr. Tillich speaks for a short while of no more than one hour in a discussion on June 22, evening. I should appreciate very much your understanding. Sincerely H. Oehler

Letters

193

(46) Tokusuke Kitagawa to Paul Tillich, Tokyo, 21. May 1960 May 21, 1960 Dear Professor Dr. Paul Tillich: May I take the liberty of introducing myself to you? I am Professor of Law at Tokyo Metropolitan University and am quite a stranger to theology. I belong, however, to the so-called “Mukyokai” (Non-church Christianity) which you have probably known from the introduction by Dr. Emil Brunner and I am especially in close connection with Dr. Yanaibara who is one of the followers of Mr. Uchimura, the founder of the Non-church Christianity. I sincerely express my heartfelt thanks for your last lecture “Basic Idea of the Religious Socialism” at the International House on the last 13th . The fact is that the Yanaibara’s group is publishing a monthly edition newspaper “Tokyo Dokuritsu Shinbun” (Tokyo Independent Paper) which is aimed at critical survey of current world situations from the Christian point of view and I have been assigned to write a short note on you, especially on your last lecture given at the International House. I have just finished this short note which is brought here. I am, however, afraid that I may have misunderstood what you wanted to convey, because, as I have already said, I am quite a layman in this field. Therefore, I shall be quite obliged, if you would take a quick glance at this note and give your kind advice. Incidentally, I was studying at Yale Law School as a Fulbright research scholar from 1957 to 1959. I hope you can enjoy your stay in Japan. Very truly yours Tokusuke Kitagawa Professor of Law Tokyo Metropolitan University

194

Letters

(47) Eugene Langston to Douglas W. Overton, Tokyo. 23. May 1960 May 23, 1960 Mr. Douglas W. Overton Japan Society, Inc. 112 East 64th Street New York 21, N. Y. Dear Doug, Shige has just left Tokyo with the Tillich’s for Kyoto, and Mr. Takagi has asked me to write you a note asking you to remit $2,000 from the Intellectual Interchange fund. This figure comprises the balance of per diem for Dr. Tillich, since you paid $300 from there, or $1,500, and $500 for other costs (see your letter of February 16th ). Per diem has already been advanced from found here, but because of extra expenses for planning, organization of travel, conferences, and interpreters – for which in each instance we have to allow something of the order of $1,500 or better – our May 1st balance of $1,500 does not allow much leeway. Dr. Tillich had a rather distressing attack of gout a week ago, was in bed for about three days, and had to cancel two lectures at I.C.U. Fortunately with good medical care he was soon on his feet again, but not without a disturbing, if as it turned out amusing train of events following. An English-language Yomiuri reporter mistook a telephone message from I.C.U. reporting that the schedule lectures had been called off (chushi) for the lecture’s sudden and unexpected death (Kyushi), and without further checking reported the latter went somewhat unceremoniously in acolum on what was and was not going on in Tokyo. This happened on May 17th , Mrs. Tillich’s birthday. Since all was otherwise well, the principal concern was to avoid having the story published in the U. S., where any number of people would suddenly begin sending cables and making telephone calls here. Due precautions were taken by getting in touch with the wire services and the Times man. The reporter and editor came to apologize, and a correction came out in the paper, and when everything was over, things were very merry and cheerful. All this is for your information in the event you are asked about it there. Sincerely yours, Eugene Langston

Letters

195

(48) Eugene Langston to Harald Oehler, Tokyo. 24. May 1960 May 24, 1960 Mr. Harald Oehler 2-20 Tomisaka, Bunkyo-ku Tokyo Dear Mr. Oehler: Your letter of may 21st has arrived during Dr. Tillich’s absence in Kyoto, and I am forwarding it to him there. However, I think you had best plan to hold only a small meeting for discussion – and not a lecture – from 5:30 to 7:00 p.m. on Wednesday, June 22ed, as agreed to by Dr. Tillich in his letter of may 20th to you. This also precludes dinner, and so unless you hear directly from Dr. Tillich agreeing to a change in plans, please do not alter the arrangement he had already accepted. Sincerely yours, Eugene Langston Executive Associate cc: Dr. Tillich

196

Letters

(49) Paul Tillich to Shigeharu Matsumoto, Kyoto. 29. May 1960 (Postcard) Mr. Shigeharu Matsumoto International House 2 Toriizaka-machi Azabu, Minato-ku, Tokyo I hope you did see the Fuji, while we are happily moved by seeing the glory of the “Kannon” and magnificent black and white Zen-paintings, Paulus had to move into a bigger room for his second lecture. Hannah und Paulus

Letters

197

(50) Eugene Langston to Paul Tillich, Tokyo. 29. May 1960 June 3, 1960 Dr. Paul Tillich Miyako Hotel Kacho-machi, Awataguchi Higashiyama-ku Kyoto Dear Dr. Tillich: Yesterday afternoon Mr. Oehler was here again to urge you to speak at Waseda. I told him that much as such a lecture might be desirable, it seemed out of the question. On Wednesday, June 22, he will meet you here at the House at 5:30, go to the OAG for an hour’s discussion from six until seven o’clock and return you to the House or wherever you wish to proceed after the discussion is over. I hope you and Mrs. Tillich are having a pleasant and not too strenuous time in Kyoto. We all look forward to seeing you here again soon. With warmest greetings. Sincerely yours, Eugene Langston Executive Associate

198

Letters

(51) Yasaka Takagi to Hannah and Paul Tillich, Tokyo, 25. Septenmber 1960 Dr. and Mrs. Paul Tillich Harvard Divinity School 45 Francis Avenue Cambridge 38, Mass. U. S. A. September 25, 1960 Dear Paulus and Hannah: We think of you very often. Only a week ago a report on the interview by Stuart Griffin appeared on the Mainichi, and it was an occasion of my happy recollections. You would be interested to know that I spent my summer in the cottage at Karuizawa, and resd Shinran’s Kyo-gyo-shin-sho, and that Suzuki was then translating the book into English. Toraji Tsukamoto is in hospital since July 14. I now realize that it was not simply a cold which prevented his meeting with you on June 25: he had been overworked, and apparently must have been conscious of same slight difficulty. Even so, I am now informed that he insisted and came to International House personally to present the two books to you on July 5, when unfortunately we were away at Karuizawa. His difficulty is caused by a slight attack of cerebral arteriosclerosis. It looks now possible that he will be back in his home, at 1733, 4-chome, Fukuzawa, Setagaya-ku, Tokyo, in a few weeks. We are hoping that he would be enabled to carry on his work of new translation of the Bible. It has been a great privilege to have Dr. and Mrs. Oppenheimer as guests on the Intellectual Interchange Program. We are working hard endeavoring to put in order the transcripts of your addresses, as we intend to do also with the Oppenheimer papers. With the warmest regards to you both, Most sincerely yours

Letters

199

(53)Yasaka Takagi to Paul Tillich, Tokyo 14. November 1960 November 14, 1960 Dr. Paul Tillich Harvard Divinity School 45 Francis Avenue Cambridge 38, Mass. Dear Paulus: Thank you very much for your kind letter of November 3, telling me about your writing to Tsukamoto and also sending him two of your own books. I am sure he will appreciate it very deeply. I feel increasingly grateful for your kind thought in writing such an excellent report on your recent trip to Japan. I am particularly impressed with your very thorough-going observation of Japan’s religious situation and aesthetic heritage and your penetrating and sympathetic understanding. I felt myself that your marvelous description of your first impressions in Japan will provide a wonderful introduction to this strange land, and feel grateful that the report has found a tremendous response with your friends, and perhaps Japan’s new friends also. But what is more important to me was your profound analysis of the religious and cultural situation in Japan, particularly of what your called Japanese Christianity, given on pages 8-10. I was deeply impressed with your compact and penetrating interpretation and felt that, together with your observations on Buddhism and Shintoism, it formed the essential part of your precious report. Although you were very thoughtful in suggesting that I tell my reactions to the report, I have little to add to the above mentioned appreciation. However, I might say that you were much too generous in describing the “leaders” at the International House. Some very minor suggestions follow, just for your reference: Page 5, line 22 from bottom, The founders should read some leaders. Page 7, line 18, comna (,) after Hisamatsu should be omitted, lest a mistaken notion might be given that Hisamatus was the chief-priest. Page 9, lines 12–13, are not quite clear, in their relation to the preceding sentense. Page 10, line 18 from bottom, usually spelt cryptomeria. Page 12, line 29, before Kyoto should read “for the Shogunate” in 12–14 centuries. Page 12, last paragraph, – Mr. S. Yanagi’s name might be mentioned before “direction” of the time. Page 14, line 10, Ashama should read “Asama”. Page 14, line 14 from bottom, Tokyo should read Kyoto

200

Letters

Daisetsu Suzuki celebrated his 90th anniversary about a month ago, and we had a little ceremony yesterday at Japan Academy in his honor. I was glad to have the chance of a personal talk with him after the occasion. I believe he has completed an English version of “Kyo-Gyo-Shin-Sho” in the summer. As you know, I am groping for my own way and plodding along as ever. Much as I tend to stray, I don’t think I have lost sight of the meaning of the revealed religion, and would continue to hope for more light for my conviction, as ever seeking after the truth. In that sense I would hope that I would outgrow what might be popularly connoted by the term Religious Socialism. Shige and Hanako should be in Paris by now, planning to reach New York a week or two before Christmas. With warmest personal regards to you both, Most sincerely Yasaka Takagi

Letters

201

(54) Yasaka Takagi to Hannah Tillich, Tokyo. 4. February 1960 February 4, 1960 Mrs. Hannah Tillich 16 Chauncy Street Cambridge 38, Mass. Dear Hannah Tillich: I have to thank you for two good letters, and also for a “littele something” the arrival of which has just been notified to me by Japan Express Camany. I was most grateful for your letter of November 18th , in which you were kind to write me about your six weeks in East-Hampton, about your family reunions and parties with friends, about Paulus’ third volume and other matters, all of which I felt so privileged to know. We were deeply grateful, too, for Paulus’ most thoughtful report. I am glad to know from Professor Ariga, with whom we had a conference on the matter of the publication of Tillich Lectures, that he had sent his careful comments on the report. It will be a fine addition in the proposed volume of “Lectures” publication, if Paulus approves of the idea. Shige and Hanako are back, looking well, but as busy as ever. I am looking forward to learning from him this evening, more about you dinner meeting for him. This is only to thank you for all your kindnesses. With warmest regards to you both, Most sincerely Yasaka Takagi

202

Letters

(55) Paul Tillich to Yasaka Takagi, Mass. 17. February 1960 Harvard Divinity School 45 Francis Avenue Cambridge 38, Massachusetts February 17, 1961 Professor Yasaka Takagi, Chairman Japan Committee for Intellection Interchange The International House of Japan, Inc. Tokyo, Japan Dear Yasaka: Hannah asked me to answer your very kind letter to us with respect to your last question. If you really think that my Japan Report is of value in a volume of my speeches, I certainly gladly agree that it be included. There is, however, the problem of same inaccuracies about names and facts in the Report which do not mean anything for the American or German reader, but which would be disturbing for Japanese readers who know better. So I would suggest that you get in touch with Prof. Ariga who has already sent me a list of mistakes and ask him, or someone else, to rectify whatever mistakes you or he may have found. I also think it would be good to indicate the fact that it was a private letter to my friends, without any official character. I was very sorry that I missed Shige and Hanako, but Hannah told me about the dinner with Shige. You can hardly Imagine how near Japan is to my mind. I often feel as if I had left it only yesterday. Is there any chance that we shall meet you here? Very cordially yours, Paulus Paul Tillich

Letters

203

(56) Yasaka Takagi to Paul Tillich, Tokyo. 4. May 1961 May 4, 1961 Dr. and Mrs. Paul Tillich Harvard Divinity School 45 Francis Avenue Cambridge 38, Massachusetts Dear Hanna and Paul: You must have thought it remiss of not to have acknowledged sooner the receipt of your most thoughtful and generous gift of electric blanket. For same unexplainable, and to me inexcusable, formalities, after much delay, it finally reached me at the International House a few days ago. Hanako and I are both extremely happy and most grateful for your gifts. We are still working on the transcripts of your lectures, which we hope will be published before the end of this year. With belated but most sincere thanks, and best wishes, Sincerely yours, Yasaka Takagi

Part F: Pictures

Abb. 1: Tokyo, International House

Abb. 2: Tokyo, International House

208

Pictures

Abb. 3: Tokyo, International House

Pictures

Abb. 4: Kyoto

209

210

Abb. 5: Kyoto

Pictures

Pictures

Abb. 6: Kyoto

211

212

Pictures

Abb. 7: Tokyo, International House

Pictures

Abb. 8: Tokyo, International House

213

214

Pictures

Abb. 9: Tokyo, International House

Pictures

Abb. 10: Nara

215

216

Pictures

Abb. 11: Kyoto

Pictures

Abb. 12: Tokyo, International House

Abb. 13: Hanedo Airport

217

218

Pictures

Abb. 14: Hanedo Airport

Abb. 15: Nara

Pictures

Abb. 16: Kyoto

Abb. 17: Kyoto

219

220

Pictures

Abb. 18: Kyoto University

Abb. 19: Kyoto

Pictures

Abb. 20: Tokyo, International House

Abb. 21: Tokyo, International House

221

222

Pictures

Abb. 22: Tokyo, International House

Pictures

Abb. 23: Tokyo, International House

223

224

Pictures

Abb. 24: Tokyo, International House

Pictures

Abb. 25: Tokyo, International House

225

226

Pictures

Abb. 26: Tokyo, International House

Pictures

Abb. 27: Tokyo, International House

227

228

Pictures

Abb. 28: Tokyo, International House

Pictures

Abb. 29: Tokyo, International House

Abb. 30: Tokyo, International House

229

Index of Names Adorno, Theodor W. VII Akiyama, Norie 44 Albrecht, Renate 46 Alegro, Adele S. 38 Ariga, Bunhachiro 27 Ariga, Naka 27 Ariga, Tetsutaro VIII, 7, 27 f., 33, 93, 110 f., 118, 127, 143, 145–148, 150–152, 157, 161, 170–172, 177, 179, 201 f. Aristoteles 54 Auden, W. H. 21 Augustinus, Aurelius 53, 55, 59 Böhme, Jacob 54 Barth, Karl IX, 11, 16, 40 Bethe, Monica 17 Bismarck, Otto von 86 Boss, Marc 2 Bragt, Jan Van 29 Brandon, James R. 25 Brauer, Jerald C. XII Brunner, Emil 41, 193 Buckly, Sandra 10 Buddha 80, 93–100, 103, 109, 124, 131 Bultmann, Rudolf 94, 182

Eisaku, Sato VII Eisenhower, Dwight D. 5, 9 f., 120, 128 Eitel 190, 192 Eliade, Mircea VII, 145 Endo, Yoshimitsu 37 Faulkner, William 7 Fehrer, Wolfgang 23 Ford, George Barry 7, 146 Fukai, Tomoaki 7 Furuya, Yasuo IX f., 16, 28, 37 Gneist, Heinrich Rudolf Friedrich von 14 Grau, Karin 2 Gregor, Paul 30 Griffin, Stuart 198 Groner, Paul 30 Gropius, Walter 7, 131

D’Arcy, Martin C. 7 Date, Tatsumi 18 DeMartino, Richard 35, 124, 147, 186 Dembski, Ulrike 17 Dionysius Areopagita (Pseudo-Dionysius) 98, 103, 108 Dower, John W. 4, 9 Dulles, John Foster 5 Duns Scotus, Johannes 54

Hagerty, James C. 10 Haines, Howard B. 178, 181 Hammarskjöld, Dag 21 Harris, John Wesley 17 Hashimoto, Akio 25 Hastings, Johna Thomas 25 Hausmann, Frank-Rutger 43 Hegel, Georg Wilhelm Friedrich 53, 59 Heidegger, Martin 54, 56, 58 f. Heigis, Peter 2 Heim, Kenneth 16, 37 Hidaka, Rokuro 24 Hiraba, Yasuharu 29 Hirai, Naofusa 18 Hirasawa, Ko 172, 177 Hisamatsu, Shinichi XI, 28, 32, 35, 94, 100, 109, 123, 143, 185 f., 188, 199 Hitler, Adolf 64, 66, 102, 110, 120 Holl, Karl IX Horton, Douglas 144 Hotta, Yoshie 21 Howes, John F. 7 Hume, David 59 Huston, Albert W. 181

Eck, Johannes 98

Idei 38

Calí, Grace XII, XIV Carman, Harry J. 148, 152, 154 Carnap, Rudolf 21 Cho, Kiyoko 12 f., 16, 21, 37 Cole, Charles W. 6 Cousins, Norman 7 Cusanus, Nicolaus 53

232

Index of Names

Iino, Norimoto 37 Imamura, Arao 13 Itakura, Junzo 13 Iwanaga, Yukichi 3 Jäger, Stefan S. 2 Jesus 93 f., 98, 103, 105–108, 110, 124 Jodai, Tano 13 Kabuki, Kyoto 32 Kabuki, Tokyo (Edo) 32 Kaimai, Jun 5, 7 Kako, Hiroko 12, 14, 16 f., 20, 22, 117, 178 Kamai, Jun 3 Kamba, Michiko 10 Kameyama, Naoto 13 Kan, Enkichi IX, 16, 22, 37 Kan, Shinako 16, 37 Kanba, Michiko 36, 38 f. Kanroji, Osanaga 18 Kant, Immanuel 54 f., 59, 66 Kato, Shuichi 21 Kawai, Kanjiro 35 Kawai, Tatsuo 4 Ken 51 Kennan, George F. 7 Kersten, Rikki 21 Kierkegaard, Sören 58 Kinoshita, Junji 21 Kishi, Nobusuke 9 f., 12, 120, 122 Kishimoto, Hideo 18 f., 31, 37 Kitagawa, Tokusuke 193 Kitamori, Kazo IX, 25 f., 37, 40 Kobayashi, Sakae 33, 93 Kodaira, Naomichi 37 Kohmoto, Testuo 165 Koizumi, Shinzo 13 Kojima, Gunzo 37 Koschmann, J. Victor 9 Kosellek, Reinhart 43 Kreamer, Hendrik 106 Kunihiro, Masao 4 Kuribayashi, Teruo 28 Kurokawa, Toshio 43 Kuwata, Hidenobu 37 Kyogoku, Junichi 39

Löwith, Karl 43 Langston, Eugene 194 f., 197 Leibbrecht, Walter 145 Lengston, Eugene 116 Leonard, Grace C. 158, 160, 162–165, 167 f., 174 Lokowandt, Ernst 18 Luther, Martin 62, 98 Maeda, Goro 36 Maeda, Tamon 13 Maekawa, Kunio 13 Mahalanobis, Prasanta Chandra 7 Mannheim, Karl VII Manning, Russell Re 2 Marcel, Gabriel 7, 58 Maruyama, Masao 21 Marx, Karl 11 Masunaga, Reiho 20 Masutani, Fumio 20 Matsukata, Saburo 13 Matsumoto, Hanako 117, 200–203 Matsumoto, Shigeharu 3–7, 13, 16, 46, 117, 148, 151, 154, 162, 165, 167, 174, 176, 196, 200–202 Matsunaga, Alicia 31 Matsunaga, Daigan 31 Mayeda, Sengaku 20 McArthur, Douglas 5, 120, 122, 128 McCracken, Robert J. 146 Meyer, Richard 25 Minaga, Kyohei 16 f., 37 Miyamoto, Takenosuke X, 16 f., 37 Miyata, Gen 37 Miyazaki, Akira 37 Morimoto, Anri 25 Morris, Ivan 21 Morrison, George Ernest 37 Mosse, Albert 14 Muto, Kazuo 28 Muto, Ken 37 Nagao, Gajin 28 Nakamura, Hajime Nanbara, Shigeru Nehru, Jawaharlal Niebuhr, Reinhold

20 38 7 16

Index of Names

Niebuhr, Richard 63 Nietzsche, Friedrich 54, 56 Nishida, Kitaro IX, 28, 32 Nishitani, Keiji 28 f., 33, 125, 157 Niwano, Nikkyo 37 Nord, Illona 2 Noro, Yoshio X, 16 f., 37, 182 f. Nozaki, Yoshiko 9 Obayashi, Taryo 33 Oehler, Harald 184, 187, 189–192, 195, 197 Ohki, Hideo IX Ômiya, Hiroshi 37 Ono, Motonori 18 Oppenheimer, J. Robert 7, 148, 198 Ôsuga, Kiyoshi 16 Otani, Kosho 35, 45, 124 Otsuka, Setsuji 29, 31 Otto, Rudolf 30 Overton, Douglas W. 149, 152, 156, 158– 160, 163 f., 168, 174, 176, 194 Pauck, Marion XIII, 1 f. Pauck, Wilhelm XIII, 1 f. Paulus 62, 65 Plato 51 f., 57, 59 Plaut, Walter 160 Plotin 52 Ponsonby-Fane, Richard Arthur Brabazon 18

233

Saito, Kayoko 37 Saito, Takeshi 39, 44 Sakaeda, Yoshiki 187, 190 Sakai, Osamu 37 Sanquist, Scott W. 25 Sansom, George Bailey 6 Sartre, Jean-Paul 54, 58 Sato, Takashi 7 Sato, Toshio 37 Schelling, Friedrich Wilhelm Joseph 54, 59, 131 Schleiermacher, Friedrich Daniel Ernst 40 Schlesinger, Arthur M. 21 Schmidt, Alfred 167, 180 Schweitzer, Albert 94 Seiffert, Johannes Ernst 29 Sen, Soshitsu 23 Senelick, Laurence 32 Shaku, Soen 39 Shigeru, Hiroshi 29 Shinbun, Yomiuri 40 Shirai, Keikichi 37 Shoten, Iwanami 2, 38 Shotoku Taishi 31 Sjöberg, Leif 21 Soper, Alexander C. 31 Stein, Lorenz von 14 Sternberger, Dolf VII Straelen, Henry van 31 Suetsuna, Joichi 20 Suzuki, Daisetz 28, 32, 38 f., 94, 100, 125, 198 f.

Quine, Willard 21 Reischauer, August Karl 23 Reischauer, Edwin O. 23 Riesman, David 7 Riezler, Kurt VII Ritschl, Albrecht 97 Rockefeller III., John D. X, 3, 5 f. Roesler, Karl Friedrich Hermann 14 Roosevelt, Eleanor 7, 146 Royama, Michio 154 Russell, Bertrand 21 Saaler, Sven 9 Saicho 30

Takagi, Kiyoko 37 Takagi, Yasaka 3–7, 13, 16, 20, 117, 139, 149, 151–153, 155, 157–159, 161 f., 164–166, 168 f., 174–177, 180, 191 f., 198–203 Takahashi, Saburo 37 Takao, Toshikazu 16 f. Takemori, Masaichi 16 f. Takeuchi, Kan 37 Takeuchi, Yoshinori 29, 33, 56, 125, 148, 151, 157, 169, 177 Tamaki, Koshiro 20 Tange, Kenzo VIII Teitaro, Daisetz 38

234

Index of Names

Thornbury, Barbara E. 25 Tillich, Hannah X, XIII, 2, 8, 12 f., 15–18, 20, 23, 26–47, 118, 132, 143, 147 f., 150 f., 154 f., 159, 162, 164 f., 167, 169, 174, 176 f., 179, 184–186, 196– 198, 201–203 Toeda, Yoshiaki 8, 42 Tojo, Hideki 120 Tokugawa, Ienari 25 Toynbee, Arnold J. 7 Troeltsch, Ernst IX, 16, 40 Tsuji, Ken 34 Tsukamoto, Toraji 198 f. Tsurumi, Shunsuke 21 Uchimura, Kanzo 7, 193 Uemura, Masahisa 39 Ukai, Nobushige 21 Unno, Taitetsu 29

Varley, Paul 15 Watanabe, Yoshio 33 Wertheimer, Max VII Whitehead, Alfred North 21 Wood, Robert W. 33, 93 Woodard, William P. 37 Yamamoto, Kano 16 f., 37 Yamamoto, Mari 10 Yanagi, Soetsu 24, 199 Yanaibara, Tadao 193 Yoshida, Shigeru 9 Yoshida, Shotetsu 20 Yoshikura, Junzo 13 Zaibatsu, Furukawa 43